LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

September 15/16

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site

http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletin16/english.september15.16.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006

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

Bible Quotations For Today

For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are dying, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God
Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians 18-25/”For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are dying, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise. I will bring the discernment of the discerning to nothing.”Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the lawyer of this world? Hasn’t God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For seeing that in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom didn’t know God, it was God’s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save those who believe. 22 For Jews ask for signs, Greeks seek after wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to Greeks, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God; because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”

If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me
Luke 09/23-27/:”23 He said to all, “If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever will lose his life for my sake, will save it. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits his own self? For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed, when he comes in his glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels. But I tell you the truth: There are some of those who stand here who will in no way taste of death until they see God’s Kingdom.”

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 14-15/16

Economic ties with China a key positive measure/Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
US and China warm up to the Paris Agreement/Yossi Mekelberg/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
This Election is Unpredictable/Alan M. Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
American Law? Or Christian Law, Muslim Law, Jewish Law/Johanna Markind/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
European Leaders Discuss Plan for European Army/Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
No WikiLeaks documents on Russia raises suspicion/Diana Moukalled/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
The role of art in diplomacy/Fahad Suleiman Shoqiran/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
The Terrorist "Wing" Scam/A.J. Caschetta/Middle East Quarterly/Fall 2016

Titles For Latest Lebanese Related News published on on September 14-15/16
Salam Launches Anti Terrorism Talks, Underlines Necessity to Elect President
Report: Hizbullah, Marada to Partake in Cabinet Meeting
Report: Hariri to Reactivate Presidential File
Spanish UNIFIL Vehicle Hit by Landmine in Ibl al-Saqi
Berri Says AMAL Awaiting Judicial Ruling as General Security Clarifies Tarras Arrest
Army Shells IS Positions in Ras Baalbek and al-Qaa
War of Words Erupts between Berri and Geagea over National Dialogue
Three Wounded in Tyre Against Backdrop of Removing Construction Violation
Change and Reform Says to Rally Sep. 28, Oct. 13: We Won't Stop before Achieving Goals
Several Hurt in Lebanese-Palestinian Clash in al-Beddawi
Chehayeb: Waste crisis in Metn and Keserwan to be resolved
Two females die as boat capsizes in Sidon
Rifi: we don't have individual preferences, we seek embetterment
Saqr refers Ksara blast dossier to army intelligence for further investigation

Titles For Latest LCCC Bulletin For Miscellaneous Reports And News published on on September September 14-15/16
“Hate crime murder in Toronto: man stabbed to death after arguing about Islam,”
Ayatollah Mehdi Khazali’s son confesses: We are all stuck in the Syrian quagmire. We are all down the drain.
Iran: Khamenei issues fatwa banning women from riding bicycles
Agonizing news from inside Iran prisons
New details of Syria ceasefire deal outlined
Spain arrests Moroccan man accused of promoting militancy
Lawmakers: Britain’s Libya intervention flawed
Iranian pilgrims decry Khamenei’s accusations against Saudi Arabia
Obama plans to increase number of refugees to US
Pentagon: Strikes on ISIS may have hit civilians
Germany to send 650 troops to fight ISIS smuggling in Mediterranean
Aid workers from Germany freed by Libyan coastguards
New York to open inquiry into Trump Foundation
N. Korea Says U.S. Pushing Peninsula to 'Explosion'
Mecca Governor in Iran Swipe over Islam Divide
Drone Strike Kills 5 Qaida Suspects in Yemen

Links From Jihad Watch Site for on September 14-15/16
Toronto: Muslim stabs non-Muslim to death after argument about Islam
Obama Admin issues veto threat of Guantanamo bill
Austrian cardinal says Muslims want “Islamic conquest of Europe”
Australia: Muslim who slashed man’s throat while screaming “Allahu akbar” also said “I have to die today”
Iran threatens to shoot down US Navy spy planes in Persian Gulf, US says Iran’s conduct “unprofessional”
Robert Spencer in FrontPage: Theodore Shoebat Joins the Jihad, Says ‘Pamela Geller Is Worthy of Death’
Al-Qaeda calls American blacks to jihad

Links From Christian Today Site for on September 14-15/16
Pope signals he will declare murdered priest Father Jacques Hamel a saint
Meet the Christians who love their enemies, even when it's ISIS
Cardinal tipped to be pope warns of 'Islamic conquest of Europe'
Retiring Archbishop of Wales delivers parting shot to conservatives: Bible can support gay marriage
How Christians are putting God into fashion
Christian charity restores hope to displaced Iraqi Christians who lost everything
Islamic State has moved from persecuting Christians to trying to 'exterminate' them
There are many reasons to criticise Hillary Clinton. Health is not one of them.
Indonesia: Bullet-riddled body of Catholic teacher found
British Christian youth worker sentenced for attempt at online grooming

Latest Lebanese Related News published on on September 14-15/16

Salam Launches Anti Terrorism Talks, Underlines Necessity to Elect President
Naharnet/September 14/16/Prime Minister Tammam Salam stressed on Wednesday that Lebanon is in the heart of the battle against terrorism and must help with the efforts to eradicate it, as he emphasized that the first step to end disorder is through the election of a president. “Lebanon is in the heart of the battle against terrorism. It is directly involved with the reduction of violent extremism that has made our region and the world a bloody panel,” said Salam in a speech at the Grand Serail during the launching of official talks over the national plan to fight terrorism. “The importance of the international strategy to fight terrorism, espoused by the United Nations General Assembly in 2006, and that of the work plan launched by the U.N. Chief in December 2015 to combat violent extremism, lies within two approaches: one that is global and relevant to fighting terrorism on all levels, and one that is local within each country,” he explained. “Violent extremism is a plight surging worldwide; yet fighting it must not remain a general international headline, but must be part of thorough work,” he added. “Confronting extremism, terrorism and violence in Lebanon requires strengthening the structure of the state through the regularity of the government institutions, and ending the current imbalances in it. The first step in that is as we have always repeated is through the election of president,” stressed the PM. He emphasized: “Strengthening the structure of the state also requires the restoration of democratic mechanisms that allow accountability, renewal of the political elites and enhancing participation in governance through the conduction of parliamentary elections in accordance with the new law that ensures fair representation.”“The battle with terrorism in Lebanon requires improving the performance of the public administrations and promoting the rule of law because any defect in the application of justice is the shortest path to extremism and terrorism,” he concluded.

Report: Hizbullah, Marada to Partake in Cabinet Meeting
Naharnet/September 14/16/Hizbullah and the Marada Movement did not take a decision to boycott the cabinet's future meetings and their latest absence from the government session was only temporary, As Safir daily reported on Wednesday. Sources close to Prime Minister Tammam Salam told the daily that discussions on the impasse at the governmental level following the absence of ministers of Hizbullah, Marada and the Free Patriotic Movement from the latest meeting are at a halt right now because of the Eid al-Adha holiday. The sources quoted Salam as saying: “It is crucial that ministers of the Change and Reform bloc understand the impropriety of boycotting the meetings, obstructing the government’s work and the continued media and political escalation.”The circles added that there is plenty of time for discussions until the next cabinet meeting on September 28, after the PM returns back to Lebanon from a trip to the United Nations in New York. March 8 ministerial sources also pointed out that “the boycott was limited to one session and that no decision has been made to boycott future meetings, at least not so far.” For his part, Speaker Nabih Berri assured that “Marada ministers will inevitably attend the next meeting and that Hizbullah who missed the latest meeting in solidarity with the FPM will in turn attend future meetings because their absence threatens the government and the party is keen on the government and keen on its continuity in the current circumstances.”Last week, Hizbullah ministers boycotted the meeting in solidarity with a similar stance taken by its ally the Free Patriotic Movement. The FPM's recent boycott of cabinet meetings is linked to the thorny issue of military and security appointments and the government's decision-taking mechanism in the absence of a president. FPM head and Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil had accused the government of not respecting the National Pact when it “convenes in the presence of ministers representing only six percent of a main component of the country (Christians).”

Report: Hariri to Reactivate Presidential File
Naharnet/September 14/16/Adviser to al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex MP Ghattas Khoury said on Wednesday that leader of the Movement and ex-PM Saad Hariri will return soon from his trip abroad and plans to give momentum to the controversial file of the presidential election, As Safir daily reported on Wednesday. Hariri plans to “reactivate the file in some way and in a new direction,” said Khoury after he held a meeting with Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea said the daily. Khoury, who was dispatched by Hariri to meet Geagea, said that the “discussions are focusing on finding a way to record a breakthrough in the file of the presidency and that no final decision has been reached so far in that regard.”“The impasse has become unacceptable mainly because of the worsening implications on the general situation in the country,” Khoury was quoted as saying.
“Hariri is still committed to the option of nominating (Marada Movement chief Suleiman) Franjieh and he will discuss this option with Speaker Nabih Berri and Franjieh after he returns back to Lebanon. Khoury concluded: “Our intention from the nomination of Franjieh was to find a solution for the presidential vacuum not to add new complications. If the horizon stays blocked we must then search for options that allow us to make a breakthrough.”Lebanon has been without a president since the term of Michel Suleiman ended in May 2014 and Hizbullah, MP Michel 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. Hariri, who is close to Saudi Arabia, launched an initiative in late 2015 to nominate Franjieh for the presidency but his proposal was met with reservations from the country's main Christian parties as well as Hizbullah. 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.

Spanish UNIFIL Vehicle Hit by Landmine in Ibl al-Saqi
Naharnet/September 14/16/A landmine exploded Wednesday under a vehicle for Spanish peacekeepers in the outskirts of the southern town of Ibl al-Saqi, state-run National News Agency reported. The blast, which occurred in the al-Tal area, did not cause any casualties, NNA said. “The Lebanese army imposed a security cordon in the area as a Spanish mine flail and a large number of military vehicles arrived on the scene,” the agency added. A joint team from the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), the Lebanese army and international truce observers has launched a probe into the incident, NNA said. UNIFIL has around 12,000 soldiers from 35 countries. The force was created in 1978 to help Lebanon restore government control over southern Lebanon after the Israeli invasion, and it was beefed up in 2006 after the devastating war between Israel and Hizbullah.

Berri Says AMAL Awaiting Judicial Ruling as General Security Clarifies Tarras Arrest
Naharnet/September 14/16/Speaker Nabih Berri announced Wednesday that his AMAL Movement is “awaiting a judicial ruling” in the case of the bombing that was aimed at targeting AMAL convoys in the Zahle region, while slamming the political uproar that accompanied last week's arrests. During his weekly meeting with lawmakers in Ain el-Tineh, Berri called for “keeping security measures and achievements away from political overbidding,” al-Jadeed television said. “Let us allow security agencies and the judiciary to work away from this overbidding because they are a shield that is protecting everyone and preserving the country's stability and safety,” Berri was quoted as saying.Referring to the Zahle bomb attack, Berri said “the victims remained silent while the killers were not satisfied.”“AMAL Movement, which was targeted by this bombing, is awaiting the ruling of the judiciary,” the speaker added. The bomb attack left an elderly woman dead and at least ten people wounded. The explosive device that was placed at a busy roundabout was targeted against AMAL Movement convoys that were carrying supporters to a rally commemorating Imam Moussa al-Sadr in the southern city of Tyre, Berri said a day after the attack. Other vehicles were hit by the blast shortly after AMAL buses passed by the roundabout, reports have said. Several suspects were arrested by the General Security last week in connection with the case. Former Rashaya mufti Sheikh Bassam al-Tarras was among those arrested and he was eventually released amid protests by the influential Muslim Scholars Committee and a number of Islamic activists.In a statement issued on Wednesday, General Security said Tarras was interrogated after his name was mentioned by a number of suspects held in the case. “Tarras was asked about his meeting in Turkey with the detainees A. Gh. and B. Kh. and a fugitive called Abou al-Baraa,” General Security said, adding that “the detainee A. Gh. confessed that Abou al-Baraa had tasked him with the bombing and that the latter had ties to Sheikh Bassam Tarras who asked him to do whatever Abou al-Baraa requests from him,” General Security added. “During interrogation, Sheikh Tarras revealed Abou al-Baraa's real identity,” General Security clarified, noting that Abou al-Baraa is wanted over the booby-trapped car that was discovered in Naameh in 2013. The car was rigged with 250 kilograms of explosives.

Army Shells IS Positions in Ras Baalbek and al-Qaa
Naharnet/September 14/16/The Lebanese army shelled the positions of the Islamic State group on the outskirts of the border towns of Ras Baalbek and al-Qaa, the state-run National News Agency reported on Wednesday. From their positions in the northern Bekaa valley, the army bombarded the IS positions with heavy artillery. It targeted the posts of the militant groups in Ksarat Shmeis al-Mkhayrmeh in the outskirts of Ras Baalbek and al-Qaa, NNA added. The army has been on high alert since the unprecedented suicide bombings that hit the Christian border town of al-Qaa in late June. Militants from the IS and the Fath al-Sham, previously the Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front, are entrenched in rugged areas along the undemarcated Lebanese-Syrian border and the army regularly shells their posts while Hizbullah and the Syrian army have engaged in clashes with them on the Syrian side of the border. The two groups briefly overran the town of Arsal in August 2014 before being ousted by the army after days of deadly battles. The retreating militants abducted more than 30 troops and policemen of whom four have been executed and nine remain in the captivity of the IS group.

War of Words Erupts between Berri and Geagea over National Dialogue
Naharnet/September 14/16/A war of words erupted on Wednesday between speaker Nabih Berri and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea over the latter's proposal that Berri reduces the number of participant in the all-party talks. “I have have carefully read your perusal as for the composition of the dialogue (members) which I have a lot to say about, but I won't because I don't like to go into a controversy with you,” said Geagea via Twitter. “I wish you luck with this composition, and I hope that you will reap the first results in the next eleven years,” said Geagea ironically. Earlier, As Safir daily said on Wednesday that Berri had emphasized in an interview that he will not call for the resumption of the all-party talks until he “senses the members' seriousness” in addressing issues, as he lashed out at Geaega's suggestion to reduce the number of participating members. Berri revealed that many political parties and figures including Hizbullah, ex-Presidents Michel Suleiman and Amin Gemayel have urged him to resume the all-party talks which he said will only do when he senses “seriousness” as for the dialogue members, the daily said. “I will not call for the resumption of dialogue until I sense the seriousness of its parties in addressing the agenda in a way that allows us to reach practical results. We had enough of verbal harangue. It is time to move from words into deeds,” Berri was quoted as saying.On a suggestion put forward by Geagea to reduce the dialogue members into five or six “to be more productive” where the LF chief expressed willingness to participate in that case, Berri replied with raised eyebrows: “This proposal is strange because it does not adhere to the nature of Lebanese reality. It is impossible to reduce the political and sectarian components into only five or six.”He added: “I did not rely on mood or discretion in the selection of those invited for dialogue, but I rather relied on one common standard related to the size of their representation in the parliament. Tampering with the equation involves a dangerous game and reflects a tendency to monopolize representation and contempt for others.”“How can we apply Geagea's theory in light of the Lebanese mosaic? In any dialogue, can we do without any of these forces: Hizbullah, Free Patriotic Movement, Mustaqbal, Tammam Salam, Najib Miqati, Walid Jumblat, Talal Arsaln, Michel el-Murr and others who represent their communities at the partisan level?” asked Berri. He continued: “I want to ask Samir Geagea: Who will represent the Christians according to the small structure he proposes? Is it the Lebanese Forces, the FPM or the Kataeb? If it was him who will partake in the dialogue, is it possible to exclude any of the others?”

Three Wounded in Tyre Against Backdrop of Removing Construction Violation
Naharnet/September 14/16/Three people were wounded, including an Internal Security Forces member, in an exchange of fire in the Palestinian refugee camp of al-Bass in the southern city of Tyre, the National News Agency reported on Wednesday. An ISF patrol was removing a construction violation in the camp of al-Bass near the EDL company in Tyre when the owners of the violations and several members form the camp started acting roughly with the security members. The dispute had quickly escalated into a gunfire fight that led to the wounding of a municipality member and another ISF member. An army patrol arrived at the scene and contained the situation. NNA later added that another Palestinian named Fayyad al-Safadi was also wounded. An ISF patrol closed the road to the camp for security reasons.

Change and Reform Says to Rally Sep. 28, Oct. 13: We Won't Stop before Achieving Goals
Naharnet /September 14/16/The Change and Reform parliamentary bloc announced Wednesday that it has started mobilizing for street protests on September 28 and October 13 as part of its escalatory steps that are aimed at pressing the other parties in the country to “abide by the National Pact.”“We have given ourselves several days and the mobilization phase has started. We are preparing for gradual escalation over the National Pact,” said the bloc in a statement issued after its weekly meeting. 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. “This Pact must be present in all the manifestations of national partnership and any hostility against this approach would be targeted against Lebanon, because (FPM founder) General (Michel) Aoun's action is aimed at rescuing Lebanon,” the bloc added. “When we start our action, it will not stop and this is a warning. It will not stop before reaching a presidency and an electoral law that respect the standards of the National Pact,” Change and Reform said. The statement also noted that Aoun “will spare no effort to establish 'the rule of the strong leaders', which is the real guarantee for achieving partnership, so that all components would be reassured regarding their present, future and fate... pending the abolition of the sectarian system.”“Our demands regarding dialogue, the presidency, the electoral law and the government are national, unifying and have to do with respecting the National Pact. Those who want to talk to us must offer us solutions that respect the National Pact,” the bloc added. 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. 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. Addressing Prime Minister Tammam Salam, Bassil has 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 earlier this month, saying Marada and the other Christian parties in the cabinet “represent a lot more than six percent.”

Several Hurt in Lebanese-Palestinian Clash in al-Beddawi
Naharnet /September 14/16/Several people were wounded Wednesday when a personal dispute erupted into an armed clash between Lebanese and Palestinian young men in the northern area of al-Beddawi, media reports said. According to state-run National News Agency, the dispute between the young men started “inside a sports complex and amusement park.” “It then escalated into gunfire and a hand grenade was also hurled,” NNA said. “The army intervened immediately and contained the clash while those involved are being pursued,” the agency added. LBCI television said the clash erupted in the vicinity of the al-Beddawi Palestinian refugee camp, pitting young men from the Zeid and Shabban families. “When the army intervened, one of the young men hurled a hand grenade at the troops, which prompted them to fire in the air and towards the man who threw the grenade,” LBCI added.

Chehayeb: Waste crisis in Metn and Keserwan to be resolved
Tue 13 Sep 2016/NNA - Agriculture Minister Akram Chehayyeb announced, on Tuesday, that "the public waste crisis in the areas of Metn and Keserwan will finally be resolved."Speaking at a press conference held in his office in Central Beirut, Chehayeb discussed the decentralization management of the waste crisis, calling on municipalities to choose locations for dumping waste piles momentarily. Chehayeb noted that "the only positive outcome following the recent Bourj Hammoud sit-in was the unanimous agreement over the need for both waste dumps in Bourj Hammoud-Jdeideh and Ghadir-Costabrava, since this is the sole obligatory prelude to a final decentralized solution to the waste issue in the end."

Two females die as boat capsizes in Sidon
Wed 14 Sep 2016/NNA - Raghida Walid, a 37-year-old woman, and Hoda Yassine, a 13-year-old, met their fate after their tourist boat capsized in Sidon yesterday, NNA field reporter said on Wednesday.

Rifi: we don't have individual preferences, we seek embetterment
Wed 14 Sep 2016/NNA - Justice Minister, Ashraf Rifi, met on Wednesday with a delegation of Tripoli Municipality marking Adha Mubarak. The meeting had been an opportunity to discuss issues hindering the work progress of Tripoli municipality. Talks also stressed the need to swiftly implement all the projects that have been endorsed by the municipality in an attempt to facilitate the citizens' livelihood. In the wake of the meeting, Rifi echoed sanguinity concerning the revivification of the city of Tripoli, especially with the highly credible individuals running the city's affairs. "We don't differentiate between individuals. All the municipality council's members are our sons and we trust them equally," Rifi said, promising that the new municipality's tasks will be strictly developmental, away from politics. "We crafted a certain vision in coordination with the Municipal Council for immediate implementation such as the pavement of roads, restoration of road pits, renovation of deteriorated infrastructure, in addition to cleaning and planting trees (...). I would like to tell the people that the current municipal council is conscious of its duties and I trust it completely," Rifi added.

Saqr refers Ksara blast dossier to army intelligence for further investigation
Wed 14 Sep 2016/NNA - Military Tribunal Government Commissioner, Judge Saqr Saqr, referred the investigation dossier of Ksara blast to the Army Intelligence Directorate to affix it to the main file and expand investigations, NNA reporter said on Wednesday.

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

“Hate crime murder in Toronto: man stabbed to death after arguing about Islam,”
by Ilana Shneider, CIJ News, September 13, 2016
Alb Effe, 28, was stabbed to death near York University on September 13, 2016 by 31 year old Alijan Arif Khan after getting into an argument over religion.
Effe – a musician and architectural technology student – was found without vital signs and rushed to Humber River Hospital where he died a couple of hours later. His death marks Toronto’s 50th homicide this year.
Witnesses told CP24 that the stabbing occurred following an argument over religion.
According to Fatah Sandhu who lives in the area and witnessed the altercation, “Some guy has been trying to say that Muslims are bad. The other guy is trying to say you guys are bad,…And last night for some reason, it just got out of hand.”
“And I heard them still out there at like 11 something and I heard one guy say, ‘Oh no, it’s because you’re Arabic,’ and the other guy was like, ‘No, it was not, it was your people,’” Griffith told CTV News Toronto.
Another neighbour said the argument heated up over the English versus Hebrew pronunciations of the name “Benjamin.”
According to Effe’s LinkedIn profile, he played music for 12 years, competed in martial arts in his younger years and won three bronze medals for Canada. He also wanted to “create peaceful and elegant environments promoting self growth and virtue.”
Khan, who is believed to be a student at York University and who apparently knew Effe personally, is facing second-degree murder.
According to the Liberal Party, “there has been a significant increase in recorded Islamophobic acts committed in 2015 that have included harassment, violent attacks, murders, arson, graffiti, property damage and death threats against Muslims.”…CIJnews could not find any evidence to support the Liberals’ claim that Canadian Muslims were murdered in 2015 in hate crimes. The Peterborough Mosque fire was investigated by Police as a potential hate crime with no clear evidence or suspects to determine the motive of the arson.

Ayatollah Mehdi Khazali’s son confesses: We are all stuck in the Syrian quagmire. We are all down the drain.ابن رجل دين إيراني بارز يعترف بغرق بلاده في المستنقع السوري
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/09/14/iran-khamenei-issues-fatwa-banning-women-from-riding-bicycles%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%88%D9%89-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%86%D8%A6%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A5%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1/
Wednesday, 14 September 2016/NCRI - In a revealing confession, Mehdi Khazali, son of Mullah Khazali, who for years has had various responsibilities in the Iranian regime, described regime’s involvement in the war in Syria as being“wrong” and “regime’s quagmire”. He said that the regime is now stuck in this quagmire. In an interview on Sunday September 11, now available on the internet, Khazali said in response to a question about Syria that getting involved in the Syrian war was wrong. He added: “if the Quds Force wasn’t asking for too much, Bashar Asad would have been eventually overthrown by 2011 and a democratic regime would have taken his place… We were providing Syria with free oil for 30 years. Well, give free oil to anyone and he’ll become your friend.”Khazali added:”Actually it seems that we’ve not had enough of the 8-year-old war with Iraq and now we’ve got involved in the war in Syria. This is wrong and we shouldn’t have intervened. I repeatedly warned… but a fool may throw a stone into a well which a hundred wise cannot pull out and this is our current situation… That is the mismanagement of Ghasem Soleimani which has given rise to ISIS and has led us to the current situation

Iran: Khamenei issues fatwa banning women from riding bicycles
فتوى للخامنئي تحرم على النساء ركوب الدرجات في الأماكن العامة

بدنا نتوقع منع النساء في لبنان من ركوب الدرجات في حال أصبح الإيراني الملالوي ميشال عون رئيساً للجمهورية..شو رأي يلي مستقتلين تا يوصولوه ع بعبدا
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/2016/09/14/iran-khamenei-issues-fatwa-banning-women-from-riding-bicycles%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%88%D9%89-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%86%D8%A6%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A5%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1/

Tuesday, 13 September 2016

Ali Khamenei, the mullahs' supreme leader, issued a ridiculous fatwa banning women's bicycling in public and in front of strangers. He said: "Riding bicycle often attracts the attention of men and exposes the society to corruption, and thus contravenes women's chastity, and it must be abandoned." (The state-run media, September 10, 2016) A week before this fatwa, Khamenei defined women's only "role and mission" as "motherhood and housekeeping" when he was declaring the "direction of the state" and general policies on "family." (Khamenei's website – September 3, 2016) These remarks and ridiculous fatwa reveal the backward nature of the fundamentalist rulers of Iran and arouse only the contempt of the Iranian people and particularly women. The mullahs' misogynous regime is beset by growing crises and is unable to respond to the most basic demands of the Iranian people and particularly women and youths. It has therefore found its only solution in stepping up repression and discrimination against women. No doubt, with solidarity and unity among the oppressed sectors of Iranian society, this fascist and misogynist regime would soon be toppled.
Women's Committee, National Council of Resistance of Iran/September 13, 2016

Iran: Pressure on political prisoners in Zahedan prison
Wednesday, 14 September 2016/NCRI - Prison officials in the Central Prison of south eastern city of Zahedan have intensified their inhumane pressures on their political prisoners.According to reports from Zahedan’s Central Prison, number of prisoners kept in ward 3 of this prison is several times its capacity so that most of the prisoners sleep on the floor. Political prisoners in this ward are kept next to the dangerous ones. The situation in ward 3 is so inhumane that the prisoners in other wards are sent into exile to this ward which is known as the “Exile Ward” among prisoners. There are 11 cells in this ward, all of them full of prisoners. Its toilets and bathrooms are worn-out and useless so the prisoners have to spend a long time in the queue before they can use them. In addition to the bathrooms being worn-out, there is no hot water during the day so that it’s not possible for the prisoners, especially the elderly and sick ones, to bath.On the other hand, prison food quality as a whole and especially in ward 3 is so bad that it’s not possible for the prisoners to eat it. The bread given to prisoners is not fully cooked and the other meals are so low-quality that the prisoners throw it in the trash after they receive it. Hygiene status in the prison is catastrophic. Rations of shampoo and other hygienic products has been cut off. Political prisoners don’t have access to medicine and medical services. This is especially true for political prisoners who need to be hospitalized outside the prison as the investigators connected to the Ministry of Intelligence prevent their being hospitalized and treated.

Agonizing news from inside Iran prisons
Wednesday, 14 September 2016/NCRI - Evin prison - According to reports, in order to put pressure on the political prisoner “Omid Shahmoradi Sanandaji”, prison officials have prevented his medical tests for surgery to be carried out.
It should be pointed out that the political prisoner Omid Shahmoradi was arrested in June 2012 and has been in solitary confinement for seven months. Gohardasht prison in Karaj (Ghezelhesar) – In protest against the overwhelming pressure in prison, “Hadi Haj Mohammadi”, prisoner of ward 2 of Ghezelhesar prison in Karaj, attempted suicide on Sunday September 11. Unfortunately he died last night in “Loghman” hospital in Tehran. A source close to his family, while emphasizing on Hadi Haj Mohammdi’s innocence, said:”Hadi along with his wife and their child were guests at Hadi’s brother’s house when Hadi was arrested along with his brother.” This source added:”All the prisoners in ward 2 of Ghezelhesar prison are suffering from extreme psychological pressure and Hadi attempted suicide in protest against such pressures.”According to another report, hot water in Gohardasht prison in Karaj has been cut off from Sunday September 11 and the prisoners do not have access to the most basic sanitary facilities like dishwashing liquid and soap. The prisoners have warned about this situation and have said that lack of hot water and the basic sanitary requirements will bring about an outbreak of contagious and skin diseases. Dizel Abad Prison in Kermanshah – According to reports, phone calls of the prisoners have been cut off from four days ago (September 8). Also a number of families of the prisoners who had referred to prison were prevented from meeting their children. Cutting off the phone calls and not having the possibility to meet the prisoners has made their families too concerned. In response to inquiries by the families of the prisoners, prison officials have told them that the situation was due to a fight between the prisoners. The families say that this is only an excuse to put more pressure on the prisoners and reject it as being unbelievable and strange.

New details of Syria ceasefire deal outlined
The Associated Press, Washington Wednesday, 14 September 2016/The new Syria ceasefire is rich in detail on the mechanics of ending violence in Aleppo. It says little about how the United States and Russia will establish a new military partnership that is seen as key to the long-term sustainability of the deal. Officials familiar with the document outline a highly technical series of requirements for both Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government and opposition forces. These include precise calculations, in meters, on how the sides would pull back from a key artery into Aleppo and where they would have to redeploy weaponry. The agreement was reached last Friday after a marathon day of negotiations between US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Underscoring the complexity of the new arrangement, even Kerry stumbled over some of the particulars while speaking shortly after the cease-fire came into effect Monday. Here are some details of the agreement, according to the US officials. They weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the still-confidential agreement and demanded anonymity.
• As of Monday, Assad’s government and opposition forces should have ceased all attacks with any weapons, including aerial bombardments, rockets, mortars and anti-tank guided missiles.
• Sides cannot seek to acquire territory.
• They should allow rapid, safe, unhindered and sustained humanitarian access to all people in need.
• In cases when self-defense is required, proportionate force should be used.
• Two checkpoints will be established on the key Aleppo artery of Castello Road. The Syrian Red Crescent will initially operate the checkpoints, with security of no more than 20 armed personnel. Security will be determined by mutual consent of government and opposition forces. The UN will monitor the personnel, physically or remotely.
• Government forces must withdraw personnel, heavy weapons and other arms to different points away from Castello Road. In some places, tanks, artillery and mortars must be pulled back at least 3.5 kilometers, or just more than 2 miles. Elsewhere, soldiers with lighter weapons have to retreat at least 500 yards from the road. Other requirements concern crew-served machine guns and observation posts.
• Opposition forces also must withdraw from the road, in many places equidistant or similar to the level of pullback by government forces. East of Castello Road, their withdrawal will depend on the action of Kurdish forces. If the Kurds retreat 500 yards, the opposition forces should do likewise. Other requirements concern heavy weapons, including infantry-fighting vehicles and tanks, and crew-served machine guns.
• Opposition must make every effort to prevent al-Qaeda-linked militants from advancing into demilitarized areas.
• All Syrians should be able to leave Aleppo on Castello Road, including opposition forces with their weapons. Fighters must coordinate with UN officials ahead of time.
• The US and Russia will address violations of cease-fire.
• The US and Russia will announce the establishment of their Joint Implementation Center after at least seven straight days of adherence to the cease-fire.
• Preparatory work for the center should have started Monday, including information-sharing to delineate territories controlled by al-Qaeda-linked militants and those controlled by opposition groups. More comprehensive delineation occurs after the center is established.
• Starting Monday, the US and Russia should have started developing actionable targets against ISIS and al-Qaeda-linked militants, so that strikes can start immediately after the center is established. Once the first strikes occur, all Syrian military air activities must be halted in agreed areas.
• The US and Russia can each withdraw from the arrangement.

Spain arrests Moroccan man accused of promoting militancy
Reuters, Madrid Wednesday, 14 September 2016/Spanish police arrested a Moroccan man on Wednesday accused of promoting Islamist militancy through social media, the Interior Ministry said. The man detained in the northeastern town of Manresa had shown signs of increased radicalism after contact with an activist recently returned from the conflicts in Syria and Iraq, the ministry said. Spain has now detained 29 people with suspected links to Islamist militancy since the beginning of the year.

Lawmakers: Britain’s Libya intervention flawed
Reuters, London Wednesday, 14 September 2016/Britain’s 2011 military intervention in Libya, ordered by former prime minister David Cameron, relied on flawed intelligence and hastened the North African country’s political and economic collapse, lawmakers said on Wednesday in a damning report. Britain and France led international efforts to help oust Libya’s then-leader Muammar Qaddafi in early 2011, using fighter jets to beat back Qaddafi’s armies and allow rebels to topple the longtime dictator. But Libya has since suffered years of chaos. ISIS has gained a foothold, former rebels still fight over territory and people smugglers have set up a huge operation, sending tens of thousands on the perilous sea journey to Europe. Cameron, who ran Britain from 2010 until July, had a “decisive” role in the decision to intervene and must bear the responsibility for Britain’s role in the crisis in Libya, a report produced by parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee said. “The UK’s actions in Libya were part of an ill-conceived intervention, the results of which are still playing out today,” said committee chairman Crispin Blunt, a member of Cameron’s Conservative party. “UK policy in Libya before and since the intervention of March 2011 was founded on erroneous assumptions and an incomplete understanding of the country and the situation.” The committee’s statement said the “ultimate responsibility rests with David Cameron’s leadership”. Earlier this year, US President Barack Obama said European allies had become distracted from the Libyan crisis after the intervention. Obama’s office later said he had not intended to be critical of Cameron. Cameron stepped down as prime minister after losing a referendum to keep Britain in the European Union, and on Monday resigned as a member of parliament saying he did not want to become a distraction for his successor Theresa May. The report said his government failed to identify from intelligence reports that the threat to civilians was overstated and that the rebels included a significant Islamist element. The post-intervention response was also lacking, it said. “Our lack of understanding of the institutional capacity of the country stymied Libya’s progress in establishing security on the ground and absorbing financial and other resources from the international community,” Blunt said.

Iranian pilgrims decry Khamenei’s accusations against Saudi Arabia
Saudi Gazette, Mina Wednesday, 14 September 2016/A number of Iranian pilgrims, who came from other countries to perform Hajj, have denounced the Iranian leader Ali Khamenei’s false claims and provocations against Saudi Arabia. They were unanimous in their praise of the Kingdom’s efforts to provide maximum degree of safety and comfort to all the guests of Allah without any disparities. “Every time I do Hajj I see new projects implemented by the government for the welfare of pilgrims,” said an Iranian pilgrim who has performed Hajj several times. Abdul Salam Mohammed Ali, who is living outside Iran, told the Saudi Press Agency in an interview that the projects implemented for the comfort of pilgrims cannot be ignored. Iranian pilgrim Ali Nadri, who lives in the United States, said he was quite happy to see the development projects in Makkah and the Holy Sites. Nadri said the development projects stand as a living example of the Kingdom’s strenuous efforts aimed at ensuring the safety and comfort of the guests of Allah. Diauddin Sadr Al-Ashrafi, an Iranian who was performing Hajj for the first time, said he was happy to be among the millions of pilgrims who came for Haj from various parts of the world. “Saudi Arabia’s efforts to make Hajj a comfortable journey are enough to reply to the false accusations made against it by the Iranian government,” he said. Ashrafi said the provocations by Khamenei against the Kingdom were aimed at creating chaos among the guests of Allah and damaging their pilgrimage. Nasser Al-Balushi, who is performing Hajj for the first time, said he was impressed by the Kingdom’s consummate services being extended to pilgrims. “These services are enough reply to the fabrications of the Iranian regime,” he said, expressing satisfaction over what he has seen and experienced. Jamal Boukarim, an Iranian journalist who is living in Kurdistan, expressed thanks for the warm welcome and generous hospitality. “The government of the King and the Saudi people are generous with every pilgrim from any part of the world,” he said. Boukarim said the fabrications of the Iranian government against Saudi Arabia were a flagrant attempt to distract its people from their deteriorating economic conditions.
*This article was first published by the Saudi Gazette on September 14, 2016.

Obama plans to increase number of refugees to US
Reuters, Washington Wednesday, 14 September 2016/The Obama Administration plans to increase the number of refugees admitted to the United States by 30 percent in fiscal year 2017, according to the Wall Street Journal, which cited an annual refugee report submitted to Congress. Secretary of State John Kerry presented the new target of 110,000 in the 2017 fiscal year starting Oct. 1, up from 85,000 in 2016, during a closed session to members of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Tuesday, according to the newspaper. Kerry has said repeatedly over the past year that the United States would admit at least 100,000 refugees in fiscal 2017 and try to admit more if it were able.
Syrian refugees
Meanwhile, a federal appeals court in Chicago is set to hear arguments in Republican Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s appeal of a ruling that blocked his order to bar state agencies from helping Syrian refugees resettle in Indiana, the Associated Press said. The appeals court is considering the case Wednesday, about two months before voters decide if Pence will be the nation's next vice president. After the November Paris attacks, Pence said he didn’t believe the federal government was adequately screening refugees from war-torn Syria. In February, a federal judge found Pence's order discriminatory against refugees. Pence administration attorneys say the directive is “narrowly tailored” in the interest of public safety. But the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana argues refugees are extensively vetted and the state's argument is “built on fear.”With AP inputs

Pentagon: Strikes on ISIS may have hit civilians
AFP, Washington Wednesday, 14 September 2016/The Pentagon said Tuesday it launched various strikes on ISIS group forces in Syria over the past several days, including hits on some targets that “may have resulted in civilian casualties.”The incidents took place September 7, September 10 and September 12, according to a statement from CENTCOM. It did not give a number of dead or injured. But in the September 10 raid “near Ar Raqqah, Syria, a strike against an ISIL (ISIS) target may have resulted in the death of civilians near where the strike occurred,” CENTCOM said. On September 7, a raid near Dayz Az Zawr, Syria, on an ISIS target struck a non-military vehicle that drove into the target area after the weapon was released from the aircraft. And September 12, a bombing near Ash Shaddadah, Syria, during a strike against an ISIL target another apparently non-military vehicle drove into the target area after the weapon was released from the aircraft, CENTCOM added. Iraqi security forces, backed by coalition air power, are in the final weeks of “shaping” operations ahead of an assault to recapture Mosul, which ISIS seized in 2014 and which remains the militant’s last main stronghold in Iraq.

Germany to send 650 troops to fight ISIS smuggling in Mediterranean
Reuters, Berlin Wednesday, 14 September 2016/The German cabinet gave the green light on Wednesday to send up to 650 troops to join a new NATO mission to combat arms smuggling by the ISIS militant group in the Mediterranean Sea. The German involvement in NATO's operation Sea Guardian will last until the end of 2017. In exceptional emergencies, it will be possible to temporarily increase the number of German soldiers involved in the mission. The deployment is part of a broader shift by Germany to expand its military role in Europe and NATO. Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen has sought to rebuild equipment and troop levels of the armed forces after years of declines. NATO members agreed to launch the new maritime mission at a summit in Poland in July. German ships are also participating in a European Union military mission called Sophia to try to combat the smuggling of weapons and people off the Libyan coast.

Aid workers from Germany freed by Libyan coastguards
the AFP, Berlin Wednesday, 14 September 2016/Two migrant aid workers from Germany who were held by Libyan coastguards have been freed, the group Sea Eye said on Wednesday, adding that the circumstances of their arrest remain unclear. The two were released late Monday, said Hans-Peter Buschheuer, spokesman for the humanitarian group that rescues migrants at sea who are trying to reach Europe from North Africa. Libya's navy had said the group's vessel, Speedy, had entered Libyan waters, and that the aid workers had sought to flee but stopped after warning shots were fired. It later said the two men admitted falling asleep before realizing they were no longer in international waters. "We have no written proof of the original location at the time of the arrest because Speedy was also taken and is still in Libya," he said. "But close to where the arrest took place, there were other NGOs from different countries... who saw the event and can attest that we were outside the 12-mile zone -- that is, we were in international waters," he said. Sea Eye is now working on securing the release of the ship, he said. "We are working with the help of the German embassy in Libya to obtain the release of the ship," said Buschheuer. "If that fails, then we would have to file a suit. The ship is worth 110,000 euros ($120,000) and an important part of our future rescues."

New York to open inquiry into Trump Foundation
the AFP Wednesday, 14 September 2016/New York state’s top law enforcement official said on Tuesday that he has opened an investigation into the Donald J Trump Foundation, citing worries the Republican presidential nominee’s charity has been involved in “impropriety.”“We have been concerned that the Trump Foundation has engaged in impropriety from that point of view,” added Schneiderman, who has been at loggerheads with the bombastic billionaire for years over the Trump University real estate program, which he has called “straight up fraud.”The Trump Foundation has faced a series of damaging stories, including by The Washington Post, which reported over the weekend that the White House candidate himself had not donated to his own charity since 2008. The Post also found other irregularities, including that Trump spent $20,000 of money that had been set aside for charitable purposes to purchase a six-foot (1.8-meter) painting of himself. And in another move, the foundation made an illegal $25,000 donation to a campaign group affiliated with Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi in 2013 as she was considering joining Schneiderman’s fraud case against Trump University. “But we have been looking into the Trump Foundation to make sure it’s complying with the laws governing charities in New York.”“A number of criminal statutes would appear to be implicated by this course of conduct.”Trump, in turn, has lashed out at Schneiderman personally for a lawsuit the state attorney general filed in 2013 against the real estate mogul over the now-defunct Trump University, calling him “Clockwork Eric.”

N. Korea Says U.S. Pushing Peninsula to 'Explosion'
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 14/16/North Korea on Wednesday accused the United States of pushing the Korean Peninsula to "the point of explosion" after it dispatched two huge bombers in a show of force against Pyongyang. The supersonic B-1B Lancers flew over South Korea Tuesday as Washington vowed its "unshakeable commitment" to defend its allies in the region following North Korea's fifth and largest-ever nuclear test conducted last week. Washington called the demonstration "just one example of the full range of military capabilities". It took similar military actions following previous atomic tests. North Korea labelled the flyover by the "infamous" nuclear bombers as Washington's attempt to seek "an opportunity of mounting a preemptive nuclear attack," referring to US plans to deploy further strategic assets to the peninsula. "These extremely reckless provocations of the US imperialist warmongers are pushing the situation on the Korean peninsula to the point of explosion hour by hour," the state-run KCNA news agency said. It warned that the North Korean army was fully armed with "all means for military counteraction" to strike back at any enemy attack in "a single blow". Washington is planning to send the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier the USS Ronald Reagan and the Japan-based Carrier Strike Group Five to South Korean waters next month for a joint naval exercise, according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency. A spokesman for United States Forces Korea declined to confirm the report to AFP, citing operational matters. South Korea hosts 28,000 US troops as the two Koreas technically remain at war since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in an armistice instead of a peace treaty. The bombers' flight came after the North on Friday carried out what it described as a "nuclear warhead test" and vowed to take further measures to increase its nuclear strike force "in quality and in quantity".

Mecca Governor in Iran Swipe over Islam Divide
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 14/16/The governor of Saudi Arabia's Mecca region on Wednesday urged Muslim religious leaders to fight sectarianism, an indirect criticism of Shiite Iran. Prince Khaled al-Faisal was speaking at a news conference to discuss the annual hajj pilgrimage, which ends on Thursday and has added to tensions between Riyadh and Tehran. "I call on Muslim leaders, whether they are political leaders, ulemas (scholars), or intellectuals, to combat sectarianism," Faisal said. For the first time in nearly three decades, Iran's 64,000 pilgrims are not attending the hajj in Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia after the two regional rivals failed to agree on security and logistics. "Combat this sectarian divide between Muslims. Islam is one and only one religion," Faisal said in Mina, a pilgrimage site on the edge of Mecca. Saudi Arabia is home to Islam's holiest sites, which pilgrims visit during the hajj, and is the seat of Sunni Islam which predominates in the Muslim world. The kingdom is founded on the teachings of 18th century Sunni preacher Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Wahhab, whose ideas have themselves been decried by critics as a driving force behind sectarianism and an inspiration to violent jihadists. Iran is the world's major Shiite power, and the two nations are at odds over a number of regional issues including the wars in Syria and Yemen. The rivals have no diplomatic relations and have been engaged in a slanging match over the hajj since last week. "Islam is unique. There is no multiple Islam," said Faisal, president of the Central Hajj Committee. He said this year's hajj occurred without incident despite "the lies and allegations... of those who wanted to place in doubt the capacity of the kingdom to serve the pilgrims."Among its concerns over Iranian participation in this year's hajj, Riyadh said Tehran had demanded the right to organize demonstrations. Tehran in turn accused Riyadh of "blocking the path leading to Allah." Security was one of the contentious issues following last year's hajj stampede which, according to foreign officials, killed roughly 2,300 people.
Iran reported the largest number of victims, at 464. Just days before the hajj began on Saturday Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei questioned Saudi Arabia's right to manage Islam's holiest sites. He called the Saudi ruling family "puny Satans" who had politicized the pilgrimage. Khamenei also said Saudi authorities "murdered" the stampede victims. Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti Abdulaziz al-Sheikh retaliated by telling a newspaper that Iranians "are not Muslims." Reiterating a point made on Tuesday by King Salman, Faisal said Saudi Arabia does not interfere in Iran's internal affairs "but we don't permit the holy sites and the hajj to be used for political ends."More than 1.8 million faithful from around the world have been attending the annual pilgrimage.

Drone Strike Kills 5 Qaida Suspects in Yemen
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/September 14/16/A drone strike in central Yemen has killed five Al-Qaeda suspects, security officials and a tribal chief said on Wednesday. The late Tuesday attack in Rada, a town in the central province of Baida, targeted a car carrying the suspected jihadists, a tribal chief told Agence France Presse. The United States has been involved in a years-long unmanned drone campaign in Yemen and is thought to have carried out dozens of strikes against what it says are al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) members. AQAP and the Islamic State group have exploited a power vacuum created by the conflict between the government and Iran-backed rebels to expand their presence in the Arabian Peninsula country. The U.S. has vowed to continue its campaign against AQAP, which it considers to be the al-Qaida network's deadliest franchise.
 

Latest LCCC Bulletin analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on on September 14-15/16

Economic ties with China a key positive measure
Khaled Almaeena/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
Once termed by Napoleon Bonaparte as the “sleeping giant,” China has now woken up and is living up to his prophecy: “The giant sleeps, and let it, for should it wake the world will shake.” China has now woken up and is shaking the world.
For 500 years China did little. While it was rich in resources it was plundered by the European powers. After the Maoist revolution, it began a process of unification and then focused on production. Many experiments were made including the ill-fated “cultural revolution.”
But the Chinese determination for achieving parity on a world scale paid off. In the initial growing process, they were described as the “yellow pencil” and what not, but they persevered. And it was American President Richard Nixon who had to go to China in 1972 to meet Chairman Mao Zedong and establish relations that admitted China to the world stage.
Saudi Arabia established diplomatic relations with China in 1990 and from that day onward, economic relations were being cemented. China became an important oil importer. However, the significance of this relation zoomed every year with the Chinese’s capacity to excel in business and industry.
China’s growing influence in the global economic arena, its new applied innovation in all fields, its capacity to tailor science and technology for Asia and Africa, its reforming of the economy from a central command system to a capitalist market and social-oriented one, has become a legend.
Encouraged by a high growth rate the Chinese have begun to play a bigger role on the world stage by enhancing their voice on all platforms be it social, economic or political. Any world economic plans without Chinese inputs would not be possible today.
This the Saudi leadership realized. And as it unfolded its Vision 2030, Deputy Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, whose aim, vision and goal for an efficient Saudi Arabia dependent on a solid non-oil economic base, decided that economic, social and industrial cooperation should be enhanced with China. And this is probably one of his key positive measures because the Chinese have a lot to offer and with no political strings attached. Encouraged by a high growth rate the Chinese have begun to play a bigger role on the world stage by enhancing their voice on all platforms be it social, economic or political
Mutual benefits
Both countries, as viewed during his recent official trip to China preceding the G20 summit, signed several economic agreements beneficial to both sides. Chinese leaders were impressed by the Deputy Crown Prince and realized his determination to make the Kingdom a producer rather than a consumer nation.
This Vision 2030, which encompasses the inclusion of all the stakeholders, is a key base for societal development. We cannot afford to let it flounder. The Deputy Crown Prince knows this and is determined that the key factor is the building of long-term economic and political relations with the East and especially China. Both countries will work together to revitalize the economy and as China’s President Xi Jinping said the G20 will play a crucial role in guiding and promoting inter-nation economic cooperation. Sustainable and balanced growth, inter-nation economic cooperation and combined solutions to face major economic and environmental challenges are key for success. Prince Muhammad bin Salman’s visit to China is significant because it is a clear indication that the Kingdom supports the international economic agenda and is ready to play a part to understand its challenges and help provide solutions to promote regional and world growth. **This article was first published in the Saudi Gazette on Sept. 11, 2016.

US and China warm up to the Paris Agreement
Yossi Mekelberg/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
One, if not the only, highlight of the recent G20 summit in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, was the formal ratification of the Paris climate change agreement by the United States and China. If the commitment taken by the two biggest world polluters is going to be translated into reality, this might be a genuine breakthrough in combating the disastrous impact of climate change. The timing of the announcement caught most observers of the struggle against the manmade damage to planet earth by surprise. Until this point both countries seemed to procrastinate over the ratification.
Despite hyped statements saturated with truism, this might be the beginning of a more responsible approach to sustainable development. President Obama rightly declared in his remarks that “… the growing threat of climate change could define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other challenge.” This was followed by another clichéd statement by the Chinese President Xi Jinping, referring to his country’s decision to ratify the 2015 agreement, “A Chinese saying goes: ‘Only commitment and decision will lead to great achievement.’” Considering the overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that human activity is causing irreversible damage to planet earth, acknowledging it and committing to take necessary steps to stop this trend is what should be demanded from world leaders. Climate change is of course not a new phenomenon; the end of the last ice age ushered in the current climate era around 7000 years ago. However, it did not happen due to human activity. According to NASA, 97 percent of scientists specializing in climate change concluded that global warming is human induced. Data collected by the scientific world shows that the 10 hottest years have all happened since the beginning of the current millennium. Considering the haplessness the world is demonstrating in dealing with migration and conflict, it stands no chance in dealing with the potential destruction of the political-economic-social order inflicted by climate change
Global ecosystem
This in return causes havoc in our global eco-system resulting in a rise in global sea-level, warming oceans, declining of the Arctic sea ice, shrinking ice sheets and extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes and tornados. An increase in the frequency of floods, droughts, and famine, among other consequences of climate change, have inevitable severe social and political ramifications, such as mass migration, domestic upheavals and wars. Considering the haplessness the world is demonstrating in dealing with the current levels of migration and conflict, it stands no chance in dealing with the potentially biblical proportion of destruction of the political-economic-social order that could be inflicted by climate change on vulnerable communities. This is unless it is addressed globally and radically. It is already evident that the poor are the worst hit by extreme weather, as they are disadvantaged in access to resources.
According to the World Bank this makes it almost impossible for them, “…to adapt or recover quickly from shocks, and they often live on the most vulnerable land because it tends to be the most affordable.” It becomes evident that eradicating abject poverty is becoming harder as a corollary of climate change.
The agreement reached in Paris last December, set a long-term goal for the world of keeping the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial (mid to late nineteenth century) levels with the aim of limiting the increase to 1.5°C. The current agreement attempts to draw some important lessons from either the mistakes of or the changing circumstances since the signing of the Kyoto Protocol. For instance, the realization that by not including the developing world in the quotas, or allowing countries and companies to buy, generate, or trade ‘emissions credits’, hampered the chances of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases and also distorted the entire process. There is a recognition in the Paris Agreement that due to significant differences in the level economic development between countries, each needed to devise its own plan for post-2020 climate actions –It should not be imposed upon them. This puts the onus on the 180 state signatories to this agreement, even if some critics suggest that it is unrealistic, and resulted in a relatively slow process of ratification. The Paris Agreement states that it will enter into force when at least 55 Parties, representing at least an estimated 55 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions, join by ratifying it. These numbers were not randomly selected, but intended to encourage China, the US and the EU, who are the main polluters, to take the lead. Hence the importance of Washington’s and Beijing’s decision to be among the 27 states who have ratified the agreement.
Obama’s keenness
Obama has a personal interest in accelerating the pace of ratification, as it is still possible that the agreement might come into effect before he leaves office, and thus would add another pillar to his lasting legacy. It became even more urgent if one takes into account that Donald Trump, who might end in the White House come January, tweeted in the past that “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make US manufacturing non-competitive.”Moreover, more than 40 percent of those who support his party believe climate change is not happening at all, compared to one-tenth of Democrats who share this belief. This served as enough of an impetus for the current president to act quickly. Reversing, or at least containing the damage to Mother Nature depends on a multi-layered and integrated approach, which will replace many decades of exorbitant and irresponsible use of fossil fuels. In order to make this change education, alteration of the global consumerist economic structure and long term investment in cleaner alternative sources of energy, instead of the instant gratification of the cheap fossil fuels, are urgently needed.
Most importantly pro-active and courageous leadership must play an important role in addressing this issue, especially in regards to the countries that are the major contributors to the emission of greenhouse gasses. Presidents Obama and Xi Jinping have taken a very important step in the right direction by ratifying the Paris agreement. Nevertheless, only through a sustained commitment by their countries and everyone else around the world, does our eco-system stand a chance of avoiding a global cataclysm fueled by climate change. Then perhaps President Obama’s reflection on ratifying the Paris agreement of, “…someday we may see this as the moment that we finally decided to save our planet,” might gain some credence.

This Election is Unpredictable
Alan M. Dershowitz/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8937/unpredictable-election
This is the strangest presidential election in my memory. Despite the polls, the outcome is utterly unpredictable. This was true even before Hillary Clinton's recent health issue. Just consider this: it was only a month ago that the Washington Post declared a landslide victory for Hillary Clinton,
"[A] dispassionate examination of the data, combined with a coldblooded look at the candidates, the campaigns and presidential elections, produces only one possible conclusion: Hillary Clinton will defeat Donald Trump in November... Three months from now, with the 2016 presidential election in the rearview mirror, we will look back and agree that the presidential election was over on Aug. 9th."
On August 24, Slate, a liberal online magazine owned by the Washington Post, similarly declared, "There is no horse race: it's Clinton by a mile, with Trump praying for black swans" -- only to "predict" one week later "Trump-Clinton Probably Won't be A Landslide." A few days ago, in a desperate attempt to analyze the new polls showing Trump closing in on Clinton, Slate explained sheepishly, "Things realistically couldn't have gotten much worse for Trump than they were a few weeks ago, and so it's not a shock that they instead have gotten a little better of late." Some current polls even show Trump with a slight lead.
The reality is that polling is incapable of accurately predicting the outcome of elections like this one, where so many voters are angry, resentful, emotional, negative, and frightened. In my new book, Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for the Unaroused Voter" I discuss in detail why so many voters now say they won't vote at all, or will vote for a third-party candidate. As the New York Times reported, "Only 9% of America Chose Trump and Clinton as the Nominees." Or to put the voter's frustration with the candidates more starkly, "Eighty-one percent of Americans say they would feel afraid following the election of one of the two polarizing politicians."
Despite their perceived lack of agency, these voters may, of course, end up voting for one of the two major candidates when Election Day comes around.
This may depend in part on whether the Johnson-Weld ticket does well enough in the polls to be included in the presidential and vice presidential debates. The rules require that a third-party candidate reach 15 percent in five national polls. This number is difficult to achieve because many of the polls do not include third-party candidates. But it is not impossible, and if it were to occur, and if the Johnson-Weld ticket outperformed or held its own against Clinton and Trump, then people who had decided not to vote or who couldn't make up their minds might cast ballots for the Libertarian candidates.
It is unlikely that the Stein/Baraka ticket will be included in the debates or that it will garner any significant number of voters in key states, because the candidates are so extreme in their views and so out of the mainstream of American political beliefs. However, if a significant number of voters do vote for a third or fourth party, this could impact the election, as the votes for Ralph Nader in 2000 may have determined the Florida outcome, which in turn determined the general election outcome.
The bottom line is that in a bizarre election like this one -- with so many variables and so much emotion -- polls may well under- or over-predict votes for the two major candidates. Think about the vote on Brexit. Virtually all the polls -- including exit polls that asked voters what they had voted for -- got it wrong. The financial markets got it wrong. The bookies got it wrong. The 2016 presidential election is more like the Brexit vote in many ways than it is like prior presidential elections. Both Brexit and this presidential election involve raw emotion, populism, anger, nationalism, class division, and other factors that distort accuracy in polling. So anyone who thinks they know who will be the next president of the United States is deceiving themselves!
To be sure, the Electoral College vote is sometimes less difficult to predict than the popular vote, because it generally turns on a handful of closely contested critical states, such as Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. But in this election, there could be surprises in states that are usually secure for one party or the other. So even the electoral vote will be more difficult to predict than in previous elections.
One reason for this unique unpredictability is the unique unpredictability of Donald Trump himself. No one really knows what he will say or do between now and the election. His position on important issues may change. Live televised debates will not allow him to rely on a teleprompter, as he largely did in his acceptance speech or in his speech during his visit to Mexico City. He may once again become a loose cannon. No one can predict what he will say or do next. This may gain him votes, or it may lose him votes. Just remember: few, if any, pundits accurately predicted how far Trump would get when he first entered the race. When it comes to Donald Trump, the science of polling seems inadequate to the task.
Hillary Clinton is more predictable, but her past actions may produce unpredictable results, as they did when FBI Director James Comey characterized her conduct with regard to her emails as "extremely careless." It is also possible that more damaging information about her private email server or the Clinton Foundation may come from WikiLeaks or other such sources (whether these "revelations" are actually incriminating seems to be beside the point for those 54% of voters who, without first-hand knowledge of the investigation, suspect that the FBI engaged in a preferential treatment by not seeking criminal charges against Clinton.) Finally, it is difficult to assess what impact, if any, her recent health issues may have on voters.
Another unpredictable factor that may impact the election is whether there are terrorist attacks in the lead-up to the voting. Islamic extremists would almost certainly like to see Trump beat Clinton, because they believe a Trump presidency would result in the kind of instability on which they thrive. If ISIS attacks American targets in late October, that could turn some undecided voters in favor of the candidate who says he will do anything to stop terrorism. If voters were to change their votes based on terrorist acts, that would only encourage more terrorism in the run-up to elections.
A final reason why this election is so unpredictable is because voter turnout is unpredictable. The "Bernie or bust" crowd is threatening to stay home or vote for the Green Party. Young voters may do here what they did in Great Britain: many failed to vote in the Brexit referendum and then regretted their inaction when it became clear that if they had voted in the same proportion as older voters, Brexit would likely have been defeated. Some Clinton supporters worry that black voters who voted in large numbers for Barack Obama may cast fewer votes for Clinton in this election. Voters who usually vote Republican but can't bring themselves to pull the lever for Trump may decide to stay home. Turnout is unpredictable, and the effect of low voter turnout is also unpredictable.
So for all these reasons and others, no one can tell how this election will turn out. It would be a real tragedy and an insult to democracy if the election were to be decided by those who fail to vote, rather than by those who come out to vote for or against one of the two major candidates.
A shorter version of this op ed, parts of which are adopted from Alan M. Dershowitz's Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for Unaroused Voters, (Rosetta 2016), appeared in The Boston Globe.
© 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.

American Law? Or Christian Law, Muslim Law, Jewish Law?
Johanna Markind/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8922/american-muslim-law
"[A] basic American legal principle [is]: American courts apply American law, rather than one rule for Muslims, one rule for Christians, one rule for Jews, and so on." — Eugene Volokh, First Amendment law professor at UCLA.
Allowing Islamic shariah law to substitute for state law regarding inheritance and related matters would undercut the values of equal protection of the laws and equality before the law, and in many instances, would violate American law.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has rejected an argument that would essentially have required a lower court to divide the proceeds of a wrongful-death suit under shariah (Islamic law) rules governing inheritance. The decision was based on technical grounds, leaving open the question of whether a state court would apply shariah in the future.
Nadir Ibrahim Ombabi, a 57-year-old taxi driver, was killed October 29, 2012, in a car accident outside Minneapolis. Ombabi was a native of Sudan, where he was a family doctor, and was working on becoming certified as a medical doctor in the U.S. when he died. He was active in Minnesota's Sudanese community.
Ombabi left behind a wife, mother, brother, and sisters. He married Nariman Sirag Elsayed Khalil in Sudan, under Islamic law. Reportedly, she was still living in Africa when Ombabi died, and he would "often send back money to help his family." His brother was living in California and a sister in Canada.
Ombabi's next of kin brought a wrongful-death claim, which was settled for $183,000. Minnesota law requires the proceeds of a wrongful-death suit to be given to "the surviving spouse and next of kin, proportionate to the pecuniary loss severally suffered by the death."
Next of kin are basically everyone who qualifies as a potential heir under the state's intestacy law. States have laws governing how to distribute property when a person dies without leaving a will. In Minnesota, if the decedent has no children (as seems true of Ombabi), or if all of his children are also children of his widow, the widow inherits the entire estate. If, and only if, the decedent leaves neither spouse nor children, the estate passes to his parents. If he leaves no parents either, it goes to his brothers and/or sisters.
The district court found "no credible evidence to prove Mr. Ombabi's mother, brother, or sisters experienced a pecuniary loss, or more importantly what that pecuniary loss is, because of Mr. Ombabi's passing." It ordered that all of the proceeds (less expenses) be given to Ombabi's widow, Khalil.
Ombabi's brother objected that the court should have divided the proceeds under Islamic law, giving the widow only 25%, Ombabi's mother's estate 16.7%, and the balance distributed among Ombabi's siblings, with the brother receiving twice as much as each sister. He based this on the claim that "the law of all parties (the decedent, his widow and decedent's next of kin) is the Islamic Law and they are all Muslims and follow the specifics of the religion."
The court rejected that argument, on the grounds that it was unsupported by legal authority or argument, and that it was unclear whether it had been raised in the lower court. As a general rule, new issues may not be raised for the first time on appeal.
The court did not prohibit application of shariah to wrongful death suits or other cases. It only held that it found no legal or factual support that would justify applying it to Ombabi's case.
As First Amendment law professor Eugene Volokh commented:
Sometimes American law does allow the implementation of foreign legal rules, or religious legal rules. A contract might, for instance, call for applying the law of Sudan, or a will might specify that the property be distributed one-fourth to the widow, one-sixth to the parents, one-sixth each to the three brothers, and one-twelfth to the one sister (whether or not that's the sharia-mandated split). A court may well enforce such provisions, subject to any constraints imposed by American public policy. ... But there has to be an American law principle calling for such application of foreign law. And in this case, there was no such principle.
Even where the party or parties have agreed to apply certain rules, American courts will refuse to enforce them if they violate American law or certain public policies. For example, American courts will no longer enforce covenants restricting the sale of land to exclude black purchasers, because doing so would effectively violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Another example: although Americans are generally free to bequeath their property as they see fit, they are not entirely free. In Minnesota, a wife or husband who lives in the state and who has been married to her or his spouse for at least 15 years is entitled to claim half of the spouse's estate (called an elective share), even if the spouse's will leaves less. That is significantly more than the 25% share to which shariah law evidently entitled Ombabi's widow (although, on the other hand, the elective share of a newlywed in Minnesota is considerably less than a wife's share under shariah).
In this case, the widow evidently lived in Sudan (where Muslim law applied), so she would not have been entitled to make a claim under Minnesota's elective share in any case.
Still, it remains to be seen whether state courts would apply shariah law, if the issue were timely raised and properly argued. Volokh suggests the court's decision was "influenced by a basic American legal principle: American courts apply American law, rather than one rule for Muslims, one rule for Christians, one rule for Jews, and so on." Notwithstanding certain exceptions, American courts also generally apply the same law to men and women.
Allowing Islamic shariah law to substitute for state law regarding inheritance and related matters would undercut the values of equal protection of the laws and equality before the law, and in many instances, would violate American law.
**Johanna Markind is an attorney who writes about public policy and criminal justice.
© 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.

European Leaders Discuss Plan for European Army
"We are going to move towards an EU army much faster than people believe."
Soeren Kern/Gatestone Institute/September 14/16
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8935/european-army

Critics say that the creation of a European army, a long-held goal of European federalists, would entail an unprecedented transfer of sovereignty from European nation states to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, the de facto capital of the EU.
Others say that efforts to move forward on European defense integration show that European leaders have learned little from Brexit, and are determined to continue their quest to build a European superstate regardless of opposition from large segments of the European public.
"Those of us who have always warned about Europe's defense ambitions have always been told not to worry... We're always told not to worry about the next integration and then it happens. We've been too often conned before and we must not be conned again." — Liam Fox, former British defense secretary.
"[C]reation of EU defense structures, separate from NATO, will only lead to division between transatlantic partners at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of many difficult and dangerous threats to the democracies." — Geoffrey Van Orden, UK Conservative Party defense spokesman.
European leaders are discussing "far-reaching proposals" to build a pan-European military, according to a French defense ministry document leaked to the German newspaper, the Süddeutsche Zeitung.
The efforts are part of plans to relaunch the European Union at celebrations in Rome next March marking the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Community.
The document confirms rumors that European officials are rushing ahead with defense integration now that Britain — the leading military power in Europe — will be exiting the 28-member European Union.
British leaders have repeatedly blocked efforts to create a European army because of concerns that it would undermine the NATO alliance, the primary defense structure in Europe since 1949.
Proponents of European defense integration argue that it is needed to counter growing security threats and would save billions of euros in duplication between countries.
Critics say that the creation of a European army, a long-held goal (see Appendix below) of European federalists, would entail an unprecedented transfer of sovereignty from European nation states to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, the de facto capital of the EU.
Others say that efforts to move forward on European defense integration show that European leaders have learned little from Brexit — the June 23 decision by British voters to leave the EU — and are determined to continue their quest to build a European superstate regardless of opposition from large segments of the European public.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that it had obtained a copy of a six-page position paper, jointly written by French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and his German counterpart, Ursula von der Leyen. The document calls for the establishment of a "common and permanent" European military headquarters, as well as the creation of EU military structures, including an EU Logistics Command and an EU Medical Command.
The document calls on EU member states to integrate logistics and procurement, coordinate military R&D and synchronize policies in matters of financing and military planning. EU intelligence gathering would be improved through the use of European satellites; a common EU military academy would "promote a common esprit de corps."
According to the newspaper, the document will be distributed to European leaders at an informal summit in Bratislava, Slovakia, on September 16. France and Germany will ask the leaders of the other EU member states not only to approve the measures, but also to "discuss a fast implementation."
Specifically, France and Germany will for the first time activate Article 44 of the Lisbon Treaty (also known as the European Constitution). This clause allows certain EU member states "which are willing and have the necessary capability" to proceed with the "task" of defense integration, even if other EU member states disapprove.
According to Süddeutsche Zeitung:
"In the wake of the British referendum to leave the European Union, Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President François Hollande have decided to demonstrate the EU's strength and to push the remaining member states to show more unity. Especially in defense policy, many projects were put on hold because Britain vetoed them. Without London, the two EU founding states, France and Germany, hope for swift decisions."
On September 8, Defense News reported that the creation of a European army was the central focus of an August 22 meeting between the leaders of France, Germany and Italy in Naples, where the three declared "the beginning of a new Europe." That meeting was followed by a meeting of defense ministers from the three countries in Paris on September 5.
According to Defense News, Italy is lobbying France and Germany to "back a plan for European tax breaks and financing for joint European defense procurement and development programs, as part of a bid to build a European army."
A confidential draft document circulated by Italy calls for "fiscal and financial incentives to support new EU cooperative programs for development and joint purchases of equipment and infrastructure supporting the EU's Common Security and Defense Policy."
In a September 8 interview with La Repubblica, the EU's foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, called for the establishment of a permanent EU military headquarters in Brussels that would manage all current and future EU military operations. "This could become the nucleus around which a common European defense structure could be built," she said.
Mogherini insisted that "we are not talking about a European army but about European defense: something we can really do, concretely, starting now." She also stressed that EU defense policy would remain under the control of European governments rather than the European Commission, the powerful executive arm of the EU.
On September 7, however, The Times reported that Mogherini will present EU leaders attending the summit in Bratislava with a "road map" and a "timetable" for creating EU military structures, which are "the foundation of a European army." According to newspaper, her plans for military structures able "to act autonomously" from NATO have led to fears that "the EU is seeking to rival the transatlantic alliance."
The Times quoted Mogherini as saying she was taking advantage of the "political space" opened by the Brexit vote:
"It might sound a bit dramatic but we are at this turning point. We could relaunch our European project and make it more functional and powerful for our citizens and the rest of the world. Or we could diminish its intensity and power. We have the political space today to do things that were not really doable in previous years."
On May 27, the Sunday Times reported that steps towards creating a European army were being kept secret from British voters until the day after the June 23 referendum:
"In an effort to avoid derailing the Prime Minister's 'Remain' campaign, the policy plans will not be sent to national governments until the day after Britons vote. Until then, only a small group of EU political and security committee ambassadors, who must leave their electronic devices outside a sealed room, can read the proposal."
On June 28, just days after the British referendum, Mogherini presented European leaders attending an EU summit in Brussels with the "EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy." The document explicitly calls for European defense integration, and implicitly calls for the creation of a European army.
According to the document, the EU strategy "nurtures the ambition of strategic autonomy for the European Union." It adds: "Gradual synchronization and mutual adaptation of national defense planning cycles and capability development can enhance strategic convergence between member states."
In an interview with The Telegraph, Liam Fox, a former defense secretary who served under former Prime Minister David Cameron, said:
"Those of us who have always warned about Europe's defense ambitions have always been told not to worry, but step-by-step that ever closer union is becoming a reality. We cannot afford to be conned in this referendum as we were conned in 1975.
"The best way to protect ourselves is to stay close to the US. The US defense budget is bigger than the next 11 countries in the world put together. Europe's defense intentions are a dangerous fantasy and risk cutting us off from our closest and most powerful ally.
"We're always told not to worry about the next integration and then it happens. We've been too often conned before and we must not be conned again."
The Conservative Party's defense spokesman, Geoffrey Van Orden, said the implications of the EU's defense ambitions are worrying:
"We can all see that the EU might play a useful role in conflict prevention and in some civil aspects of crisis management. But its ambitions go beyond that. The EU motive is not to create additional military capability but to achieve defense integration as a key step on the road to a federal EU state.
"The US and indeed the UK are being misled if they imagine that such moves will enhance NATO — the key guarantor of our collective defense. On the contrary, creation of EU defense structures, separate from NATO, will only lead to division between transatlantic partners at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of many difficult and dangerous threats to the democracies."
Mike Hookem, the defense spokesman of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), said his party had been warning about the dangers posed by the EU army concept for years:
"I'm pleased to see people are finally waking up. An EU army is not some Eurosceptic fantasy, there are many in Brussels hell-bent on making it happen."
Soldiers from the Eurocorps on parade in Strasbourg, France, on January 31, 2013. Eurocorps is an intergovernmental military unit of approximately 1,000 soldiers from Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg and Spain, stationed in Strasbourg. (Image: Claude Truong-Ngoc/Wikimedia Commons)
Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.
Appendix
Select quotes regarding a European army
European federalists have been calling for the creation of a European army in one form or another since 1950. Although a European army is still a long way away from becoming reality, the ultimate goal of European federalists is full defense integration leading to a European military under supranational control.
Since the Lisbon Treaty, which forms the constitutional basis of the European Union, entered into force in December 2009, the political momentum toward European defense integration has picked up steam. The drive toward European defense integration has accelerated during the Obama administration, which has often appeared indifferent to Europe and transatlantic relations. Another important obstacle to European defense integration was removed when Britons voted in June 2016 to exit the European Union.
What follows is a collection of quotes from senior European officials regarding a European army and integrated defense.
September 9. The EU's foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, said:
"I believe a window of opportunity has been opened to give life to a European defense. I wanted to send the message that, despite the British exit, Europe can and must move forward with the process of integration. The prospect of Brexit offered an opportunity not to be slowed by the country that was always most determinedly opposed to the idea of pooling the instruments of defense."
August 26. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a staunch critic of the EU's migration policies, said a joint European army was needed to keep migrants out. At a news conference after a meeting between Central European member states and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Warsaw, Orbán said: "We should list the issue of security as a priority, and we should start setting up a common European army."
August 22. Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka called for greater European military integration:
"Our experiences with the last migration wave have shown the importance of Europe's internal borders. In the face of uncontrolled mass migration, even states in the center of Europe have realized that internal borders must be better controlled. Aside from better coordinated foreign and security policy, I also believe that in the long term, we will be unable to do without a joint European army."
July 23. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said:
"The withdrawal of the British from the EU has led to a significant reduction in the continent's military strength, and from a military policy perspective we must not remain in this defenseless position... A European army must protect the continent from two sides, from the East and from the South, in terms of protecting against terrorism and migration. Europe cannot even continue to exist without an alliance — a joint EU army."
July 13. The German Defense Ministry released a white paper outlining the country's future defense and security policies. The document calls for steps leading to the creation of an EU army, such as the integration of military capabilities and defense industries. "We are aiming to establish a permanent European civil-military operational headquarters in the medium term," it says. The white paper also says that citizens of other EU countries could be allowed to serve in the German army. Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said:
"Britain has paralyzed the European Union on the issues of foreign and security policy. This cannot mean that the rest of Europe remain inactive, but rather we need to move forward on these big issues."
June 28. French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier released a joint document titled "A Strong Europe in a World of Uncertainties." It states:
"The security of EU member states is deeply interconnected, as these threats now affect the continent as a whole: any threat to one member state is also a threat to others. We therefore regard our security as one and indivisible. We consider the European Union and the European security order to be part of our core interests and will safeguard them in any circumstances.
"In this context, France and Germany recommit to a shared vision of Europe as a security union, based on solidarity and mutual assistance between member states in support of common security and defense policy. Providing security for Europe as well as contributing to peace and stability globally is at the heart of the European project.
"France and Germany will promote the EU as an independent and global actor able to leverage its unique array of expertise and tools, civilian and military, in order to defend and promote the interests of its citizens. France and Germany will promote integrated EU foreign and security policy bringing together all EU policy instruments.
"The EU should be able to plan and conduct civil and military operations more effectively, with the support of a permanent civil-military chain of command. The EU should be able to rely on employable high-readiness forces and provide common financing for its operations. Within the framework of the EU, member states willing to establish permanent structured cooperation in the field of defense or to push ahead to launch operations should be able to do so in a flexible manner. If needed, EU member states should consider establishing standing maritime forces or acquiring EU-owned capabilities in other key areas."
June 26. In an interview with Welt am Sonntag, the Chairman of the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, Elmar Brok, called for the immediate creation of a joint military headquarters and for the eventual establishment of an EU army:
"We need a common military headquarters and a coalition of the willing in accordance with the permanent structural cooperation of the EU Treaty. An EU army could eventually arise from such a group. This could help to strengthen the role of Europeans in the security and defense policy, together better fulfill the responsibility of Europe in the world and also to achieve more synergies in defense spending."
June 24. French President François Hollande said:
"Europe needs to be a sovereign power deciding its own future and promoting its model. France will therefore be leading efforts to ensure Europe focuses on the most important issues: the security and defense of our continent, to protect our borders and preserve peace in the face of threats."
May 29. British Armed Forces Minister Penny Mordaunt said: "A centrally controlled army would be a massive step to the EU's goal of full political integration, but it would be a very dangerous move."
February 4. German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen confirmed an agreement to integrate some 800 German soldiers into the Dutch navy. While in Amsterdam, where she met with the Dutch Defense Minister, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, von der Leyen called the plan a "prime example for the building of a European defense union."
December 15, 2015. The European Commission proposed creating a European Border and Coast Guard. The proposal, which was put forward in response to the ongoing European migrant crisis, called for a rapid reaction force of 1,500 officers who would be able to deploy even if a member state did not ask for its help.
October 15, 2015. The president of the European People's Party (EPP), Joseph Daul, said: "We are going to move towards an EU army much faster than people believe."
September 12, 2015. An unpublished position paper drawn up by Europe and Defence policy committees of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Party (CDU) was leaked to The Telegraph. The document sets out a detailed 10-point plan for military co-operation in Europe. It calls for "a permanent structured and coordinated cooperation of national armed forces in the medium term." It adds:
"In the long run, this process should according to the present German coalition agreement lead also to a European Army subject to Parliamentarian control.
"In the framework of NATO, a uniform European pillar will be more valuable and efficient for the USA than with the present rag-rug characterized by a lack of joint European planning, procurement, and interoperability."
June 15, 2015. Michel Barnier, Special Adviser on European Defence and Security Policy to European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, wrote:
"Member States are slow to accept that they need to go beyond a model where defense is a matter of strict national sovereignty.... It is time for a reckoning: traditional methods of cooperation have reached their limits and proved insufficient. European defense needs a paradigm change in line with the exponential increase in global threats and the volatility of our neighborhood. The past has shown that European defense does move ahead if and when there is political will."
March 9, 2015. In an interview with Die Welt, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said the EU should establish its own army to show Russia it is serious about defending European values:
"Europe has lost a huge amount of respect. In foreign policy too, we are not taken seriously. A common European army would show the world that there will never again be war between EU countries. Such an army would help us to build a common foreign and security policy and allow Europe to meet its responsibilities in the world. With its own army, Europe could respond credibly to a threat to peace in a member country or in a neighboring country of the European Union."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said they support Juncker's proposal for a European army. In an interview with Tagesspiegel, Steinmeier added:
"The long-term goal of a European army is a major policy objective and has been part of the Social Democratic Party's (SPD) party program for many years. Given the new risks and threats to peace in Europe we now need, as a first step, a rapid adaptation and updating of the common European security strategy."
March 8, 2015. In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio, German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said:
"I think that the German army is ready, under certain circumstances, to be subordinated to the control of another nation. That is the goal, that in the European Union we step by step more firmly establish our cooperation, especially in security policy. This intertwining of armies with a view to having a European army is the future."
May 15, 2014. Jean-Claude Juncker, the European People's Party lead candidate for president of the next European Commission, wrote:
"I believe that we need to work on a stronger Europe when it comes to security and defense matters. Yes, Europe is chiefly a 'soft power.' But even the strongest soft powers cannot make do in the long run without at least some integrated defense capacities. The Treaty of Lisbon provides for the possibility, for those Member States who want to do so, to pool their defense capabilities in the form of a permanent structured cooperation."
December 19, 2013. The speaker of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, called for the creation of a European army: "If we wish to defend our values and interests, if we wish to maintain the security of our citizens, then a majority of MEPs consider that we need a headquarters for civil and military missions in Brussels and deployable troops."
November 15, 2009. In an interview with The Times, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said it is a "necessary objective to have a European army." He added:
"Every country duplicates its forces, each of us puts armored cars, men, tanks, planes, into Afghanistan. If there were a European army, Italy could send planes, France could send tanks, Britain could send armored cars, and in this way we would optimize the use of our resources. Perhaps we won't get there immediately, but that is the idea of a European army."
May 6, 2008. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier called for the establishment of the European army "as soon as possible." He said he had been in talks with his French counterpart to discuss "future structures" of a European army.
December 10-11, 1999. European officials meeting in Helsinki agreed to develop a European Rapid Reaction Force. Also known as the Helsinki Headline Goal, EU member states pledged that by 2003 they would be able to deploy a European military force of 60,000 troops within 60 days and for a period of potentially one year. This goal has never been met.
December 3-4, 1988. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac met at the French port city of Saint-Malo to discuss future EU defense integration. The summit declaration, which laid the political foundation for a common European defense policy, stated:
"The European Union needs to be in a position to play its full role on the international stage... The Union must have the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises."
October 24, 1950. The Pleven Plan, named after French Prime Minister René Pleven, was the first plan to create a unified European army. It proposed the "immediate creation of a European army tied to the political institutions of a united Europe." It stated:
"A European army cannot be created simply by placing national military units side by side, since, in practice, this would merely mask a coalition of the old sort. Tasks that can be tackled only in common must be matched by common institutions. A united European army, made up of forces from the various European nations must, as far as possible, pool all of its human and material components under a single political and military European authority."
The Pleven Plan was rejected by the French Parliament because it infringed on France's national sovereignty.
© 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.

No WikiLeaks documents on Russia raises suspicion
Diana Moukalled/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
It is difficult to ignore the critical views pertaining to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s judgment, especially considering his position in the crisis between the United States, which the leaked documents focus on, and Russia, which acts like a sponsor for Assange and markets the documents he reveals. More importantly though, Russia appears to be the least targeted when it comes to leaked documents and, on the contrary, seems to benefit from them. We must admit that for a decade now, Assange has managed to completely change the concept of investigative journalism and succeeded in exposing the fault lines within democratic societies and political regimes. However, it is naive to submit to Assange’s mockery of the current campaign against him and to his statements that the criticism directed at him is nothing but a mere “American McCarthyism against Russia.” Assange has been engaged in many struggles and disputes to defend the documents he leaked. There are several cases pending against him that have led to legal procedures in Sweden and in other countries. He has been staying at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for years now as he cannot leave without getting arrested.The most prominent critique of Assange was detailed in a comprehensive report published by the New York Times. The report raises important questions about Assange’s relations with Russia and the significance of documents leaked about Russia. It also addresses how WikiLeaks gradually lost interest in publishing documents pertaining to facts, which the entire world knows about Kremlin and its involvement in struggles and violations in and outside Russia. Meanwhile, there is a professional relationship between Assange and the Russian Today channel. This is in addition to the fact that Russian media outlets and President Vladimir Putin have continuously marketed Assange’s work. This does not mean that the documents leaked about the US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and about the American administration are not true as they contribute toward establishing a transparent and more just societies.
There is something really suspicious about the Russian role in Assange’s work and his silence over Russia’s reported violations
Investigative journalism
Modern investigative journalism, which Assange represents, is in an unpleasant situation because there is currently a party that is attempting to exploit it against another. This transforms investigative journalism from a tool that exposes wrongful acts into the one that covers some parties’ ill practices.
What’s interesting in the reports that discuss Assange’s motives are the testimonies of people who have worked with him but then stopped because they felt that the battles that Assange is fighting, particularly those related to American elections, are closer to being personal and based on revenge. As a result, they do not aim to serve the public interest.Any person who is convinced about the role of journalism and its significance will be concerned about the decline of a website like WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks, the documents of Edward Snowden and the Panama Papers, have heralded a new phase of investigative journalism during our digital era as they exposed details pertaining to random acts of corruption and political hypocrisy. This is why these documents – that relate to influential figures – are significant. In these cases, there is a threat that people like Assange will fall into the trap of the inflated ego which might delude them into believing that they are fighting certain parties. Assange has already displayed courage in the many stances he has taken and the documents he has leaked. However, there is something really suspicious about the Russian role in Assange’s work and his silence over Russia’s reported violations.
It is true that Assange is the mastermind behind WikiLeaks but it is disappointing to see his journalistic work being sometimes being reduced to personal calculations. **This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Sept. 12, 2016.

The role of art in diplomacy
Fahad Suleiman Shoqiran/Al Arabiya/September 14/16
In 1985, Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd bin Abdulaziz visited the United States for the first time after assuming governance. The reception he received was massive. During this visit, the then-American President Ronald Reagan delivered a speech during a dinner hosted at the White House in honor of the king. Since the speech raised issues related to Arab relations with Israel, the king decided not to respond to Reagan and not to deliver the speech prepared in advance. He chose to talk about sports in Saudi Arabia. Back then, the Saudi league played in tournaments and won championships. It was a smart speech that maintained the sanctity of the occasion as there was possibility of a difference of opinion due to the different positions on the peace initiative proposed by him. After dinner, the king accompanied Reagan to another hall where a band was playing music and a girl was singing opera. The king was jubilant as he listened to the creative artistic work. Art in, its different forms, plays important political and diplomatic roles. During his visit to China, Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman presented the painting “The Silk Road” – by artist Ahmad Mater – as a gift to the Chinese president. It was a diplomatic message to China. Earlier, Prince Saud al-Faisal had diplomatically invested in Condoleezza Rice’s interest in music and cinema. He found out about her taste and, on one occasion, presented some CDs to her as a gift. Rice, who studied French and plays the piano, has been fond of Mozart since childhood. She said playing music is very relaxing although it’s not easy when one plays pieces of famous composers. She is fond of German composer Johannes Brahms’ music because it’s solid and expresses deep emotions. Rice also said that she does not like music with excessive emotions and therefore is not attracted to Hungarian composer Franz Liszt and does not care much about Russian Romantic-era musicians like Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff. Art brings in what politics is incapable of and it establishes the basis for joint political projects
Music to the ears
Art for diplomacy surfaced during the talks between Saudi Culture and Information Minister, Adel al-Toraifi, and his counterpart in Japan. While in Tokyo, Al-Toraifi spoke about music, the royal academy of arts and the progress of music in Japan.
He said: “I am a fan of the classical music. My favorite is Brahms’ symphony no.2 and I especially liked it when Austrian composer Herbert Von Karajan presented it in the 60’s, and I think he’s widely recognized in Japan. I would like to one day see a Saudi young man who can play the cello on the international level like famous artist Yo-Yo Ma.”Art brings in what politics is incapable of and it establishes the basis for joint political projects. The recent American-Iranian rapprochement began with talks about art. By the end of 2009, a conference about Afghanistan was held in The Hague. The conference was attended by American diplomat Richard Holbrooke and his consultant Vali Nasr. During one of the breaks and while the participants drank coffee and ate some snacks, Holbrooke reached out to head of the Iranian delegation, Mehdi Akhondzadeh, and talked to him about an Asian arts exhibition which he visited and voiced his admiration of some of the displayed Iranian pieces which date back to the era of the Iranian Safavid kingdom. Mehdi Akhondzadeh smiled and nodded in approval. At that point, Holbrooke’s aides then realized that the Obama administration intends to engage in serious negotiations with Iran.
In his prominent book “A history of diplomacy,” Jeremy Black discusses how art has been linked to diplomatic work. In a chapter on the 17th century, he notes how art played a big role in politics. He narrates how the envoy of the Landgraviate of Hesse-Kassel in London bought paintings and a mini pocket telescope for its prince in the mid-18th century. Black also notes how Russian Queen Catherine the Great used her diplomats to own works of art of which the most prominent were those at the Houghton Hall. He adds that diplomats were also expected to buy works of art for other prominent figures. Black also highlights the role of famous painter Peter Paul Rubens at clearing the political atmosphere in terms of English-Spanish relations at the beginning of the 17th century as he played a skillful diplomatic role. Art and culture play a role in the world of politics. The diplomacy sheltered by art and armed by culture can infiltrate societies and charm leaders. It reflects respect for countries, nations and people. Alliances cannot be forged without demonstrating awareness about the society one aims to connect with. Each society has its history, symbols and legends and prominent politicians spend a lot of time discussing all that with their counterparts. This is where art plays a role and improves the prospects of negotiations. In his aforementioned book, Black said diplomacy is a game that’s based on making alliances and it is part of the game of war or at least of the game of using power.
**This article was first published in Asharq al-Awsat on Sept. 08, 2016.

The Terrorist "Wing" Scam
A.J. Caschetta/Middle East Quarterly/Fall 2016
Terrorist groups pose as providers of charitable services to help them continue their violent activities. Above, ISIS's logo is slapped onto care packages as the jihadist group rebrands aid from the U.N. and other sources. The Muslim Brotherhood continues as both a dispenser of social services and an incubator for jihad. The Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks, also dispenses medical relief.
Modern terrorist organizations have managed to flourish despite their enemies' attempts to squash them and have often done so by hiding in plain sight behind a nominal disguise. The most successful groups have achieved a kind of parity with the countries they attack by masquerading as complicated and diverse establishments for which terror is but one facet of their true—and variegated—nature. Nearly all terrorist organizations operating today have learned to conduct effective subterfuge by pretending to diversify.
On the rhetorical level, the illusion is advanced when a terror organization claims for itself an ancillary "wing," "arm," or "branch." Most often it is either a "charitable wing" that operates orphanages and hospitals and distributes aid to the poor, or a "political wing" devoted to achieving the group's aims through negotiation. In reality though, the group and its newly-sprouted wings are never separate but rather integral, interdependent parts of a whole. The pose allows them to prosper by legitimizing their continued existence as aid providers or embryonic governments rather than terrorist groups.
The most successful terrorist organizations achieve respectability by launching quasi-political branches or by operating charities.
Even if a group does not itself refer to the new organization as its wing, eager journalists, academics and politicians surely will. The illusion of segmentation is among the most effective tools in the terrorists' propaganda kit as they cleverly play on the compassionate nature of their targets and exploit the myth that all charities are inherently good, that philanthropy is intrinsically a praiseworthy undertaking, and that freedom to practice one's religion is a universal right even when that practice denies basic human rights to others.
Western nations are keen on rewarding those who participate in a democratic process and engage in negotiations because this is seen as the rational, civilized way to bridge differences. Mere participation in the political process becomes a desirable outcome in and of itself. Western nations also give generously to charitable causes and facilitate the work of others who do likewise.
Terrorists understand this, and so like the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing they disguise their violent nature with the cloak of legitimacy through their nonviolent wings. Only by exposing the "wing" charade can states begin to adopt policies that effectively counter this ubiquitous tactic.
The Confidence Game
In the late nineteenth century, many radical organizations reveled in their infamy and wore the label terrorist proudly.[1] But after World War II, most sought to distance themselves from the newly-stigmatized term, calling themselves instead revolutionaries, freedom fighters, or resisters to imperialism.
At the same time, however, another trend emerged in which terrorists sought to replace the notoriety of their predecessors with an appearance of legitimacy. This was a means of survival rather than an ideological shift. By transforming its image as a violent group into that of a provider of charitable services or a legitimate political player, a terrorist group gains the time and space necessary to sustain a campaign of violence.
Terrorist organizations that use this subterfuge are merely following a template perfected by other criminal organizations. For traditional criminal syndicates trading in stolen or illegal products and services, this has historically involved the creation of "dummy" or "shell" companies to hide their illicit work and profits. Likewise, criminal gangs and drug dealers have long known that distributing goods to the poor (turkeys at Thanksgiving or toys at Christmas)[2] can buy them a degree of support and silence. The most successful terrorist organizations achieve a kind of respectability either by launching quasi-political branches or by operating charities, thus purchasing the toleration and even loyalty of those in their areas of operation.
A target state that agrees to negotiate with the political wing of a terrorist organization does so largely because of a credible threat of violence. Once a state falls for the phony compartmentalization, acknowledging or negotiating with a terrorist group's wing, the bait has been taken. The con then evolves as the political wing offers to dissuade the military wing from undertaking more violence. Similarly, a target state will often give money to the charitable wing of a terrorist group in the hope that this action will sway hearts and minds within the population from which future terrorists are likely to emerge. The opposite, though, is true. A terrorist group with a charitable wing that operates a hospital, school, or orphanage has cleared a path to hiding both money and suspects; it can handily treat wounded terrorists and inculcate new ones. Further, any outside funds that go to humanitarian initiatives run by the terror group free up money for arms or violent undertakings. Any state that criminalizes a terrorist organization's militant wing but allows its charitable wing to continue unfettered or negotiates with its political wing merely keeps the conflict alive by perpetuating the scam.
Sinn Féin's Original "Political Wing"
Irish nationalism had existed for centuries before Arthur Griffith founded Sinn Féin in 1905 as a political party. Claiming to seek compromise through diplomacy, Sinn Féin became the self-styled political wing of the resistance while the violent, terroristic work was carried out by a series of militias (the Irish Republican Army [IRA], the Provisional Irish Republican Army, the Real Irish Republican Army). Whereas these militias insisted upon a no-compromise approach to a complete break with Britain, Sinn Féin took a less rigid public stance. Sinn Féin and the militias eventually agreed on what Brendan O'Brien called the "long war strategy" whereby the "IRA command structure and its illegal arsenal remained intact, waiting to see if 'politics' would deliver."[3] But without the threat of violence from unrepentant militarists, no British government would have taken Sinn Féin seriously as a genuine political actor. Sinn Féin was little more than a front for the IRA with a great deal of fluidity between their membership; IRA commander Martin McGuinness, for example, became Sinn Féin's chief negotiator with the British government in the 1990s.
When it was expedient to do so, Sinn Féin claimed that it was trying to rein in those among the resistance it euphemistically called "activists" or "volunteers." But whenever Sinn Féin members who were not IRA members tried to dictate tactics, the limits of their power became clear:
"I'd have to say the army rules the roost," said one involved, seasoned observer. "The IRA people," he said, "were very conscious that an integral part of the struggle was propaganda and politics. So the long war strategy needed Sinn Féin. But if there was a settlement the army didn't like, Sinn Féin would be pushed aside."[4]
The IRA's long war strategy proved to be very effective. During the Bill Clinton presidency, Sinn Féin's Gerry Adams was among the most frequent foreign "diplomats" admitted to the White House (after arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat) and was granted a seat at the table when the Good Friday agreement of 1998 was negotiated. But after the 9/11 terror attacks, the George W. Bush administration gave Sinn Féin and Adams the cold shoulder, joined surprisingly by Sen. Ted Kennedy (Democrat, Mass.),[5] who had come to regret his earlier support for the group.
Britain's Queen Elizabeth beams at Martin McGuinness (left)—the "Butcher of Bogside"—a former leader of the Irish Republican Army, the group responsible for the murder of her cousin Lord Mountbatten in 1979. McGuinness and Gerry Adams of the IRA/ Sinn Féin partnership perfected the bait and switch whereby the West negotiates with terrorists pretending to be politicians. Their example has served as a model for groups throughout the Middle East.
By 2005, Ireland's justice minister Michael McDowell had publicly named Adams and McGuinness as members of the IRA's Army Council,[6] and in 2007, Bertie Ahern, former prime minister of Ireland, put it more bluntly when he declared that Sinn Féin and the IRA were "both sides of the same coin."[7]
And yet, to those desperate for an end to violence, the prospect of a moderate political wing with which to negotiate continues to offer hope, throwing a lifeline to the terrorist organization it does not deserve. In June 2012, Britain's Queen Elizabeth shook the hand of Martin McGuinness—the "Butcher of Bogside"[8]—a former leader of the Irish Republican Army, the organization that was responsible for the murder of her cousin Lord Mountbatten in 1979.[9] McGuinness and Adams have perfected the swindle whereby the West negotiates with terrorists pretending to be politicians, and their example has served as a model for other groups throughout the Middle East.
The Muslim Brotherhood's "Charitable Wing"
While Sinn Féin and the IRA were founded separately and only later formed their symbiotic relationship, Hassan al-Banna originally founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 as an umbrella organization with units devoted to politics (Islamism and the restoration of the caliphate) and to charity (mostly focused on poor Egyptian boys). Only later, in 1940, did a militant wing appear. Drawing recruits from his version of the Boy Scouts, Banna used graduates of the Brotherhood's "Rover Scouts" to make up the core of an elite vanguard known as the Apparatus or the Special or Secret Apparatus (al-Jihaz or al-Tanzim al-Khass, al-Jihaz as-Sirri) willing to kill for the cause.[10] Still later, in 1944, Banna launched a medical wing that operated clinics and pharmacies, and in 1945, founded the Muslim Sisters, which ran a girls' school.
The Brotherhood's charities provided shelter, support, and new recruits to the cause.
As a result of its assassination of Egyptian prime minister Mahmud Fahmi Nokrashi on December 28, 1948, the Brotherhood was forced to go underground although its charities, hospitals, schools, social clubs, and youth groups remained intact for a time and continued to provide shelter, support and, most importantly, new recruits to the cause.
After an attempt on President Gamal Abdel Nasser's life in 1954, however, all known Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Egypt were rounded up and either executed or imprisoned. The organization might have withered to nothingness had it not been for Zaynab Ghazali's Muslim Women's Association (Jama'at as-Sayyidat al-Muslimat), which had pledged allegiance to the Muslim Brotherhood and managed to provide
food, medical care, and other support to ... help reconstitute the organization, serving as a liaison among dispersed members andsympathizers, and conducting seminars on Islam with activists in her home.[11]
Physicians in a Muslim Brotherhood "field hospital" treat injured demonstrators in Egypt, 2013. The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 as an organization devoted to politics and to charity. In 1940, a militant wing was formed. In 1944, the Brotherhood launched a medical wing, and in 1945, founded the Muslim Sisters, which ran a girls' school.
Over the next six decades, the legal status of the Brotherhood in Egypt seesawed between outright banning, to sporadic, intense repression, to a begrudging but limited acceptance, to a brief spell in power under Mohamed Mursi's presidency. The organization has regularly franchised student, charitable, and even media wings throughout its sphere of influence while successfully camouflaging its relationship to these organizations.[12] From the beginning, its "method was to employ flexibility [muruna] and concealment [taqiya or kitman] in order to spread Islam,"[13] especially in the West, and this wing charade was perpetuated either covertly or openly in every country to which the Brotherhood spread. In Jordan, for instance, the Muslim Brotherhood is a legal group that participates in politics through its "political wing," the Islamic Action Front, while its connections to Hamas account for its militant wing.[14] The Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, itself a Brotherhood offshoot, retains a subsidiary called Jamaat-ud Dawa (JuD) as its charitable wing. Alongside supplying medical relief and establishing emergency clinics, JuD publishes a decidedly political weekly (Jarrar) and runs more than three hundred seminaries inculcating the Brotherhood's Islamist message.[15]
One Brotherhood document calls for the destruction of American society through "civilizational jihad."
In the aftermath of 9/11, some of the Brotherhood's secretive doings and strategic imperatives have begun to be uncovered by U.S. and European authorities. A document dated December 1, 1982, which came to be known as "The Project" was discovered in a 2001 raid on the home of Youssef Nada, the director of the at-Taqwa Bank of Lugano, Switzerland. In it, Muslims worldwide are exhorted to set up dawa(proselytization) groups in the form of charities and other religious, cultural, and political organizations, which can operate out in the open expressly for the purpose of providing cover for violent jihad.[16]
"An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" dated May 19, 1991, is another document that came to light that elaborates on the concept of wings, arms, and branches in the Brotherhood. Written by Muhammad Akram (a senior official of both the Brotherhood and Hamas) it calls for the destruction of American society through "civilizational jihad" modeled on the actions of the prophet Muhammad:
our prophet Muhammad ... placed the foundation for the first civilized organization, which is the mosque, which truly became "the comprehensive organization." And this was done by the pioneer of contemporary Islamic dawa, Imam martyr Hasan Banna ... when he and his brothers felt the need to "reestablish" Islam and its movement anew, leading him to establish organizations with all their kinds: economic, social, media, scouting, professional, and even the military ones.[17]
Akram concluded that America was "a country which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations" and cited as tools for the overall objective of overthrowing the United States a list of twenty-nine Brotherhood organizations including the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim Students Association, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Muslim American Society, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and the Occupied Land Fund (aka Holy Land Foundation).[18]
Although these documents and their implications are in the public domain and were widely reported on in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, over time these wings have been treated by reporters and pundits as moderate organizations largely because they have not been involved in acts of violence. The Muslim Brotherhood itself received a tremendous boost to mainstream acceptance by none other than U.S. president Barack Obama who pushed to have its leadership invited to his now-infamous Cairo speech of June 4, 2009. The Obama administration has not only supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and abroad but has also served the group's interests domestically, treating the organization as a moderate ally, even hiring Brotherhood activists for important posts influencing foreign policy.[19] In the latest wrinkle to this stratagem, many of the original twenty-nine front groups listed in the explanatory memorandum have coalesced into an American Muslim Brotherhood political PAC called the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations,[20] in essence becoming the political wing of the charitable wing of a terrorist organization.
Palestinian Terror Groups
Yasser Arafat, a founding member of the Fatah terror group and subsequent chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), was perhaps the consummate master in the art of terror dissembling. Under his leadership, a ragtag group of saboteurs morphed into a national liberation movement, which in turn became a government-in-exile, finally to be transformed into an oppressive, kleptocratic regime in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, courted by politicians the world over. Arafat ultimately convinced the world that the PLO was a political party, only loosely affiliated with a series of autonomous terrorist organizations. But in fact, neither the PLO nor Fatah, its foremost constituent organization, have ever renounced violence as asserted by the 1968 Palestinian National Charter, which Arafat pledged to revise as part of the Oslo "peace process" but never did, and which was reaffirmed by Fatah's sixth general congress as late as August 2009: "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase."[21]
Yasser Arafat (left) of the Fatah terror group meets with Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu. In 1976, the dictator urged Arafat to feign small concessions in order to reap financial rewards from the West. "Brother, Arafat, how about pretending to break with terrorism? The West would love it." Arafat was an apt pupil.
Ion Pacepa, former Romanian spy chief, recounts how his former boss, dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, urged Arafat to feign small concessions in order to reap financial rewards from the West: "How about pretending to break with terrorism?" Ceausescu reasoned. "The West would love it."[22] Arafat initially balked, but the Romanian dictator assured him that no real transformation was necessary:
Nothing serious, only a few cosmetic changes. Like transforming the PLO into a Palestinian government-in-exile ... In the shadow of your government-in-exile, you can keep as many operational groups as you want as long as they are not publicly connected with your name. They could mount endless operations all around the world while your name and your "government" would remain pristine and unspoiled, ready for negotiations and further recognition.[23]
Arafat took up Ceausescu's advice with a vengeance, and this deception culminated in the signing of the Oslo accords, which enabled the PLO to establish control over the Palestinian population in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (via its dominated Palestinian Authority, [PA]) without effectively shedding its commitment to Israel's destruction.
When the PLO/ PA's rivals in terror, Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), engaged in suicide bombings, Arafat found himself forced to condemn their violence or risk appearing diplomatically irrelevant. But in order to continue to be relevant on the Palestinian street and to continue his violent campaign against Israel, his next move was to sprout a new and more militant wing called Tanzim, which itself sprouted yet another even more violent wing, the al-Aqsa Brigades (later called the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades), which would become one of the deadliest suicide bombing groups of the Oslo era.[24]
Arafat's bait-and-switch tactics can be contrasted with those of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, founded in 1980 strictly on terroristic principles and initially with no pretense of nonviolent charitable or political aspirations. The PIJ's operating principles reflected the opposition of its founders (Fathi Shiqaqi, Abdel Aziz Odeh, and Bashir Musa) to "the gradualism of the Muslim Brotherhood and the PLO's strategy of 'occupation management.'"[25]
The FBI and U.S. Immigration Service exposed several U.S. academic and charitable groups as terror front groups.
But the group also soon decided to use Western gullibility to further its goals. In 1988, Sami Arian, a tenured professor at the University of South Florida (USF), founded the Islamic Committee for Palestine (ICP) along with the World and Islamic Studies Enterprise (WISE) on the university's Tampa campus. ICP itself was an outgrowth of the Islamic Concern Project ostensibly dedicated to "helping the poor, the refugees, the displaced, the orphans, the sick, the handicapped and the homeless" while WISE purported to be a think-tank affiliated with USF's Committee for Middle East Studies. By 1995, the FBI and the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) exposed these as academic and charitable front groups and shut them down; the investigation found, among other incriminating evidence, a letter soliciting a rich Kuwaiti for funds so that suicide bombings and the "jihad effort in Palestine" could continue.[26]
Charity Spawns Hezbollah
While the Iranian-created terror group Hezbollah was born on the ruins of the Lebanese civil war (1975-90), its origins go back to a group of Shiite clerics educated in Najaf, Iraq, in the 1950s and 1960s who relocated to Lebanon and "wove a clandestine network that became known as Hizb al-Dawa—the 'Party of the Calling.'"[27] One of those clerics, Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah (1935-2010) was at the center of a series of charitable organizations which morphed into Hezbollah.
Cleric Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah organized a series of clinics, youth clubs, schools, and orphanages in Lebanon and, later, the Mabarrat Charitable Association. One of the association's wings eventually became Hezbollah. The group's ability to conduct terrorist attacks has always been dependent upon its ability to undertake "charitable work."
Fadlallah was a mesmerizing sermonizer alert to the suffering of the disenfranchised Shiite community of Beirut but was perhaps an even better "community organizer." He established social and cultural associations including clinics, youth clubs, and schools, and as the Lebanese civil war began to take its humanitarian toll, created the Mabarrat Charitable Association. Out of this organization grew a number of wings including the benign-sounding Muslim Student Union and a militant arm, which came to be known as Hezbollah.
Though Fadlallah insisted until the day he died that the Dawa party and Hezbollah were not connected and that he was not a member of Hezbollah, few scholars believe him. An exception is Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, who vehemently denies a Fadlallah-Hezbollah connection, but then devotes much of her work to whitewashing Hezbollah's terrorist activities, portraying it as a group of "guerilla fighters who were practicing their legitimate right to resist a foreign occupation."[28] Few scholars deny the connections between Fadlallah and Hezbollah, and analyst Matthew Levitt has shown how the Dawa party is "a key constituent element within Hezbollah" providing it with new members such as terrorism mastermind Imad Mughniyeh, who joined Fadlallah's Muslim Student Union, itself described as a branch of Fadlallah's Dawa Party.[29] Fadlallah also seems to have taken lessons from the Sinn Féin-IRA playbook as seen by his willingness to act as a supposedly neutral intermediary between Hezbollah and Western governments seeking the return of their citizens taken hostage by the group.
Hezbollah's success can be attributed to its domination of all levels of Shiite society. Its ability to conduct terrorist attacks has always been dependent upon its ability to conduct "charitable work." Hezbollah outperformed its rival Lebanese militia AMAL by controlling the world they shared on
three levels: the ideological-religious, with the aim of mobilizing society and incorporating into it motifs such as religious activism, resolve, and willingness for personal sacrifice for the sake of the whole; the social, with the aim of abolishing ethnic discrimination and social injustice and improving the living conditions of the Shiite population; and the military, with the aim of bringing about the expulsion of all foreigners.[30]
But rather than recognizing the cohesion of Hezbollah's interests and how such interests enabled the organization to flourish, Western journalists, academics, and politicians chose to apply the wing metaphor and ignore how its activities were all interconnected. What is particularly galling is that a number of Hezbollah leaders have been surprisingly open about the con game they are running. Naim Qassem, Hezbollah's "deputy secretary-general," has denied that there are distinct wings to Hezbollah and admitted that the "same leadership that directs the parliamentary and government work also leads jihad actions."[31] Another Hezbollah member (and former Lebanese member of parliament), Ismail Sukariyya, has stated publicly that "it is impossible to separate the political [arm] from the military one."[32]
In spite of these affirmations of the unity among Hezbollah's parts, the West is still unwilling to give up on the wing construct. After Bulgarian police and Interpol proved Hezbollah's culpability for a July 2012 bombing that killed five Israelis and one Bulgarian, the European Union (EU) finally decided to designate Hezbollah a terrorist organization—only to "clarify" that the "militant wing" alone would be so designated.[33] The decision was a deadly farce, for money sent to the charitable or political wing of Hezbollah—or any other terrorist organization for that matter—inevitably finds its way to the militant wing. At least their fellow Arabs understand: The Saudi press called such a distinction "an insult to people's intelligence"[34] while the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) named Hezbollah a terrorist organization, opening up the possibility of further sanctions against the group.
Hamas
In 1973, Ahmad Yasin, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood living in Gaza, established the Islamic Center (al-Mujamma al-Islami), ostensibly to operate schools and clinics. Over the next decade, this Islamist organization, which eventually emerged as Hamas (acronym for Harakat al-Muqawamma al-Islamiya—the Islamic Resistance Movement), grew steadily at the PLO's expense:
While the welfare and charity arms of Israel's public enemy number one, the PLO, were compelled to remain clandestine in Gaza and the West Bank throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the Mujamma was able to operate openly and freely. From its legally registered offices in Gaza, it set up kindergartens charging reduced fees and offered free food and clothing donations. It established clinics offering primary health care and free or subsidized medicines.[35]
After proclaiming its existence to the world on December 14, 1987, in August 1988, Hamas issued its covenant, which described the nascent organization as "a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine."[36] Hamas itself purports to have three separate branches: a political wing, which plays the Sinn Féin role, dealing with governments and nongovernmental organizations (though it is far less interested in feigning moderation than Sinn Féin was); a military wing, the Qassam Brigades, named after a Syrian Islamist killed by the British army in Palestine in November 1935; and the social wing, or the dawa (proselytism) infrastructure—a complex socio-political operation geared to widening Hamas's popular base by economically supporting ordinary Palestinians, rather than its followers alone, while exposing them to its values and jihadist ideology and creating widespread financial dependency on the assistance it provides.
Hamas, founded by Ahmad Yasin, began as a charity, operating schools and clinics, and grew into a radical Islamic movement. Reporters, academics, and Western politicians speak of its wings as distinct, separate units. But Yassin declared: "We cannot separate the wing from the body. If we do so, the body will not be able to fly. Hamas is one body."
The press, most academics, and virtually all Western politicians accept the fraudulent separation premise, treating members of the political wing as diplomats, peace partners, or subjects for interviews rather than murderers or collaborators in murder. But again, this is an illusion, deployed to hoodwink gullible Westerners into ignoring "the myriad ways in which virtually every Hamas political and social activity is inextricably bound up with its terrorist mission."[37] Like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas is structured in a strict hierarchical fashion with the political leadership overseeing all fields of activities, setting the movement's goals and strategy, and delegating responsibility for their implementation to the various bodies and organs. Both Hamas's founder, Yasin, and his immediate successor, Abdul Aziz Rantisi, admitted as much, with Yasin stating in 1998: "We cannot separate the wing from the body. If we do so, the body will not be able to fly. Hamas is one body."[38] Rantisi reiterated in 2001 that
Hamas' political wing determines the overall policy for the movement [and the] military wing operates at the pleasure of the political bureau, and is subordinate to it.[39]
This, however, did not prevent former president Jimmy Carter from praising Hamas leader Khaled Mishal as someone who is "strongly in favor of the peace process,"[40] a sentiment echoed by British Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn.[41]
Understanding the Metaphor
Any fight against a terrorist organization is a propaganda war as much as it is a legal case or a military engagement. Nation-states are often slow to acknowledge (let alone react to) words and ideas deployed as tactical weapons. The first step in fighting any tactic is understanding it, and yet there is scant rhetorical analysis of the terms and few attempts to tease out meanings through apparent etymologies.
By treating the wings of a terrorist group as separate entities, journalists, analysts, and politicians are abetting these groups.
For instance, why has "wing" emerged as the preferred term in Western discourse? Why not refer to the counterfeit segments as "divisions" or "branches" or even the United Nations' preferred term, "organs"? Though these terms are sometimes used, each connotes a kind of unity that terrorists seek to conceal: "Division" is too corporate, and "branch," a tree metaphor, suggests natural outgrowth. The goal is to create an illusion of separation, and these terms simply do not work. Likewise, the seldom-used terms "organ" and "arm" suggest a kind of unity from which there is no escape. In a witty 2005 Washington Times column, Tony Blankly argued insightfully that the militant and political arms of the IRA and Hezbollah were not separate entities at all. He derided
the gorgeous vision of dealing separately with the political and military arms of a terrorist organization—in the expectation that the political arm will grow while the military arm will wither. Unfortunately both arms are connected to the same body, which is governed by the same brain. And it is the brain of a killer.[42]
So the term "wing" has become the mainstay trope camouflaging nearly every significant terrorist organization's true structural integrity. But its meaning is not unambiguous. One option is to see the metaphor as implying the anatomy of a bird or the parts of an airplane; thus a wing in this usage denotes a "lateral part or appendage."[43] The Hamas covenant suggests this possibility toward the end of Article 27 where it distinguishes between Hamas and the "secularist" PLO: "One's cousin is the wing one flies with—could the bird fly without wings?" But such a reading of the metaphor is problematic since many terrorist groups have more than two wings and since, like arms or branches, it implies an organic unity that terrorists want to obscure.
Another option is to consider the term's meaning in military jargon: "Either of the two divisions (right wing, left wing) on each side of the main body or centre of an army or fleet in battle array" or "each of the two divisions of a regiment of an air force." But this does not shroud the militaristic nature of the organizations; rather, it does the opposite. Therefore, the most logical reading of the term is to consider it an architectural metaphor, with the "resistance" as a large building and wing denoting a "subordinate part of a building on one side of the main or central part." This usage insinuates the difficulty for those, say, at the top floor of the building (the political wing) to follow and control the activities of those at the basement (the militant wing), and it likens the resistance to an amorphous, unnamed body caught in the middle. It also portrays the terrorist organization as something all Westerners can relate to: a giant bureaucracy with inevitable glitches and miles of frustrating red tape.
A government wishing to preserve the illusion that it does not negotiate with terrorists may welcome a bogus political wing partner.
Repeated and thoughtless use of the term reinforces the deception and increases the likelihood of its success. By accepting the premise of the metaphor and treating the wings of a terrorist group as separate entities, journalists, analysts, and politicians are in fact abetting these groups. Their reasons for doing so vary. A government wishing to preserve the illusion that it does not negotiate with terrorists while doing precisely that may welcome a bogus political wing as a negotiating partner.
Journalists who identify more closely with terrorists than with their victims, wishing to avoid the term "terrorist" at all costs, have been more than willing to play along with the ruse:[44] Whenever a new wing of a group is discovered to be engaged in terrorism, or too closely-related to the main terrorist power structure, it sprouts a new wing that distances itself from the parent wing until its true nature is also discovered after which it sprouts another new wing. The entire process is thus potentially unending.
Conclusion
Rather than treating terror groups' wings as separate parts of a building with discrete and independent functions, governments should take the metaphor but subvert it. The first step would be to make clear that all wings of a terrorist group will be considered parts of the same building, hidden behind a facade—an elaborate and decorative but false front of a building that disguises its true shape. Governments can then proceed by inflicting legal damage on one part of the structure that will invariably weaken the entire edifice.
In the United States at least, the tools for inflicting such damage are available in two "material support" statutes enacted in 1994 and 1996.[45] Acting U.S. Attorney James T. Jacks noted, following the conviction of the Holy Land Foundation trial defendants in 2009, that the statues recognize
that money is fungible, and that money in the hands of a terrorist organization—even for so called charitable purposes—supports that organization's over-all terrorist objectives.[46]
In practical terms, just as the Treasury Department's forensic accountants track down shell companies set up by criminal organizations and then bring in law enforcement to break up the gangs, so Western nations must deal with the shell charitable organizations that terrorist groups routinely set up to hide and then transfer resources to their militant wings.
The Canadian government seemed to be taking just the right steps when it revoked the legal charity status of the Canada Development Foundation (DF) of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) but still fell into the trap posed by terrorist con artists. The ISNA, one of the original twenty-nine Muslim Brotherhood front groups listed in the Brotherhood's 1991 explanatory memorandum, had established a Canadian branch which, in turn, set up a separate charitable wing called the ISNA Development Foundation. The Development Foundation was found to have sent money to the Pakistani Relief Organization for Kashmiri Muslims with its own strong ties[47] to the Islamist group Jama'at-e-Islami,[48] which has its own militant wing, Hizbul Mujahideen.[49] But while the Canadian Revenue Agency shut down the so-called Development Foundation, it has not thus far revoked the charity status from the parent group, ISNA Canada, leaving it free to launch another wing if it so chooses.[50]
As illustrated by much of the West's response to some of Israel's military actions during Operation Protective Edge in 2014, the wing charade poses serious diplomatic and public relations problems for targeted states. When Israel was forced to retaliate against missile launchers and weapons caches secreted in Gazan schools and mosques, there was an immediate uproar from many Western capitals. "Civilized" nations would not condone military tactics turned on charities, hospitals, and orphanages, despite evidence that they were being used to target Israel's citizens and notwithstanding repeated Israeli warnings to remove all civilians from these hot zones.
Charities affiliated with terrorist groups must not be allowed to turn donations into detonations.
This ruse must be challenged and defeated. Charities affiliated with terrorist groups must not be treated as genuine aid organizations. In the United States, they should not be granted 501(c) status and allowed to operate freely, thereby turning donations into detonations. This will be a difficult task for Western nations, hobbled by their tendency to treat all charity and philanthropy as intrinsically valuable and untouchable.
Similarly, governments with a history of treating the political wings of terrorist organizations as legitimate state actors will find it difficult to reverse course although they must. The example of Sri Lanka and its fight against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is instructive here. In addition to a navy, air force, and ground forces, as well as suicide squadrons, the LTTE maintained a political wing. Following the election of President Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2005, a new Sri Lankan offensive against the rebels commenced, culminating in the deliberate targeting and killing of the head of this political wing, S.P. Thamilchelvam.[51] Despite world-wide condemnation, the Sri Lankan government did what it needed to cut off the head of this particular hydra, defying the wishes of the international community and fighting back with overwhelming, rather than merely proportionate force. So did Egyptian minister-of-defense-turned-president Abdel Fattah Sisi by toppling the Muslim Brotherhood government, then outlawing the movement as a terrorist organization despite the Obama administration's harsh response to this move.[52] Yet even Sisi stopped short of following his policy to its logical conclusion by proclaiming Hamas's military wing—but not the organization itself—a terrorist organization.[53]
Perhaps the most notorious terror group currently operating, the Islamic State, aka ISIS, has taken on the trappings of an actual state by setting up ruling institutions, selling oil from the territory it captured, and even minting its own currency.[54] It has also undertaken a propaganda campaign, portraying itself as the caretaker of children stricken with cancer[55] and, like Hezbollah, opening its own schools.[56] Whether the West will be gulled by this, should ISIS also tone down its anti-Western rhetoric and actions, remains to be seen.
Columnist Tony Blankley pointed out that both Al Capone and the Nazis engaged in charitable services for the poor of Chicago and Germany respectively. He wrote, "Any political party that has its own private army is inherently not a democratic institution. Nor is it likely to evolve into one."[57]
Taking this advice one step further, the civilized world should agree that any entity calling itself the nonviolent social, charitable, or political wing of a terrorist group should be treated exactly as its militant wing is treated. Terrorists use the term "wing" as a rhetorical ploy to divert attention from their crimes and to help finance their violence. Though the ploy is ubiquitous, and the premise of separation is widely accepted, all evidence indicates that the wings of a terrorist group are never separate. Rather, like Odysseus's horse, they disguise the warriors within. Western governments should not repeat the Trojans' mistake.
**A.J. Caschetta is senior lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology and a Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum.
[1] See Walter Laqueur, ed., Voices of Terror (Naperville, Ill.: Sourcebooks, 2004), especially Bakunin, "Revolution, Terrorism, Banditry"; Sergey Nechaev, "Catechism of the Revolutionist"; Nikolai Morozov, "The Terrorist Struggle"; Pyotr Kropotkin, "The Spirit of Revolt"; and John Most, "Advice for Terrorists."
[2] See, for example, Tristram Korten, "Our Hero the Drug Dealer," The Miami New Times News, Apr. 23, 1998.
[3] Brendan O'Brien, The Long War: The IRA and Sinn Féin, 2nd ed. (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1993, 1999), p. 13.
[4] Ibid., p. 285.
[5] The New York Times, Mar. 15, 2005; The Washington Post, Mar. 17, 2005.
[6] Jim Allister, "n-must-prove-it-supports-the-rule-of-law-28414328.html">Sinn Fein must prove it supports the rule of law," The Belfast Telegraph, Jan. 9, 2007.
[7] Ibid.
[8] John Simpson, "Martin McGuinness: Butcher of Bogside to brave statesman," BBC, June 27, 2012.
[9] The New York Times, June 27, 2012.
[10] Gudrun Kramer, Hasan al-Banna (Oxford: One World, 2010), pp. 70-5; Richard P. Mitchell, The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 206.
[11] "Zaynab al-Ghazali, 1917-2005," in Roxanne L. Euben and Muhammad Qasim Zaman, eds., Princeton Readings in Islamist Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), pp. 275-82; Gilles Kepel, Muslim Extremism in Egypt, Jon Rothschild, trans. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1985), pp. 29-30.
[12] Alyssa A. Lappen, "The Muslim Brotherhood in North America," in Barry rubin, ed., The Muslim Brotherhood: The Organization and Policies of a Global Islamist Movement (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), p. 162.
[13] Ibid., p. 169.
[14] Barry Rubin, "Comparing Three Muslim Brotherhoods," in Rubin, ed., The Organization and Policies of a Global Islamist Movement, pp. 10-13.
[15] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Special Dispatch 5647, Feb. 16, 2014.
[16] "The Muslim Brotherhood 'Project' (continued)," Dec. 1, 1982, in Front Page Magazine, May 11, 2006.
[17] Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," May 19, 1991, The Investigative Project for Terrorism archives.
[18] Ibid.
[19] See, for example, John Rossomando, "Egyptian Magazine: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration," Investigative Project on Terrorism, Jan. 3, 2013; The Washington Times, June 3, 2013.
[20] "Muslim Brotherhood Now Has Its Own U.S. Political Party," Investor's Business Daily (Los Angeles), Apr. 2, 2014.
[21] "The Palestinian National Charter: Resolutions of the Palestine National Council July 1-17, 1968," art. 9, Yale Law School, Avalon Project; "Fatah's Sixth General Conference Resolutions," MEMRI, Aug. 13, 2009.
[22] Ion Mihai Pacepa, Red Horizons: Chronicles of a Communist Spy Chief (New York: Kampmann and Co., 1987), p. 25.
[23] Ibid., pp. 27-8.
[24] Efraim Karsh, Arafat's War (New York: Grove Press, 2003), pp. 213-35.
[25] Roxanne L. Euben and Muhammad Qasim Zaman, introduction to "Hamas 1987" in Princeton Readings in Islamist Thought, p. 7.
[26] Steven Emerson, Jihad Incorporated (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2006) p. 242.
[27] Martin Kramer, "The Oracle of Hizbullah" in R. Scott Appleby. ed., Spokesmen for the Despised (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), p. 89.
[28] Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, Hizbu'llah, Politics and Religion (London: Pluto Press, 2002), p. 3.
[29] Matthew Levitt, Hezbollah (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2013), pp. 22-48; Kramer, "The Oracle of Hizbullah," p. 85; Augustus Richard Norton, Hezbollah (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007), chap. 2, "The Founding of Hezbollah"; Eitan Azani, Hezbollah: The Story of the Party of God from Revolution to Institutionalization (New York: Palgrave, 2009), pp. 39, 50; Jamal Sankari, Fadlallah, The Making of a Radical Shi'ite Leader (London: Saqi Books, 2005), p. 15.
[30] Azani, Hezbollah, p. 63. Italics in original.
[31] European Jewish Press (Brussels), May 22, 2013.
[32] MEMRI Special Dispatch 5347, July 24, 2013.
[33] The Washington Post, July 22, 2013.
[34] MEMRI Special Dispatch 5401, Aug. 9, 2013.
[35] Beverly Milton-Edwards and Stephen Farrell, Hamas, Islamic Resistance Movement (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2010), p. 47.
[36] "The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement," Aug. 18, 1988, art. 2, Yale Law School, The Avalon Project.
[37] Matthew Levitt, Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), p. 33.
[38] Reuters, May 27, 1998.
[39] Levitt, Hamas, p. 39.
[40] Times of Israel (Jerusalem), May 2, 2015.
[41] The Telegraph (London), July 13, 2015.
[42] "Talking with terrorists,"The Washington Times, Mar. 15, 2005.
[43] All definitions are quoted from The Oxford English Dictionary.
[44] Honest Reporting, Apr. 10, Apr. 30, 2013.
[45] The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 2339A; The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act § 2339B.
[46] "Federal Judge Hands Down Sentences in Holy Land Foundation Case," U.S. Justice Department, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, D.C., May 27, 2009. Jacks also calls the HLF "the chief fundraising arm for the Palestine Committee in the US created by the Muslim Brotherhood to support Hamas."
[47] Animesh Roul, "Indian Investigations Reveal Funding System for Promoting Jihad in Kashmir," Terrorism Monitor, Jamestown Foundation, Washington, D.C., Apr. 4, 2014.
[48] MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5564, Dec. 13, 2013.
[49] "Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM)," Global Security, Alexandria, Va., accessed Apr. 24, 2016; "Hizb-ul Mujahideen," Institute for Conflict Management, New Delhi, accessed Apr. 24, 2016.
[50] Mississauga News (Ont.), Sept. 24, 2013.
[51] Stephen Hopgood, "Tamil Tigers, 1987-2002," in Diego Gambetta, ed., Making Sense of Suicide Missions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), p.74.
[52] BBC News, "Profile: Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood," Dec. 25, 2013.
[53] Reuters, Jan. 31, 2015.
[54] CNN, Nov. 14, 2014.
[55] Jihadism and Terrorism Threat Monitor, MEMRI, Aug. 12, 2014.
[56] MEMRI Special Dispatch 5439, Sept. 9, 2013.
[57] The Washington Times, Mar. 15, 2005.
Related Topics: A.J. Caschetta | Fall 2016 MEQ receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.