LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 12/15

Bible Quotation For Today/I am leaving the world and am going to the Father
John 16/25-28: "‘I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures, but will tell you plainly of the Father. On that day you will ask in my name. I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf;
for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. I came from the Father and have come into the world; again, I am leaving the world and am going to the Father.’"

Bible Quotation For Today/Moses fled and became a resident alien in the land of Midian. There he became the father of two sons."
Acts of the Apostles07/17-29: "‘But as the time drew near for the fulfilment of the promise that God had made to Abraham, our people in Egypt increased and multiplied until another king who had not known Joseph ruled over Egypt. He dealt craftily with our race and forced our ancestors to abandon their infants so that they would die. At this time Moses was born, and he was beautiful before God. For three months he was brought up in his father’s house; and when he was abandoned, Pharaoh’s daughter adopted him and brought him up as her own son. So Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in his words and deeds. ‘When he was forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his relatives, the Israelites. When he saw one of them being wronged, he defended the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. He supposed that his kinsfolk would understand that God through him was rescuing them, but they did not understand. The next day he came to some of them as they were quarrelling and tried to reconcile them, saying, "Men, you are brothers; why do you wrong each other?" But the man who was wronging his neighbour pushed Moses aside, saying, "Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?" When he heard this, Moses fled and became a resident alien in the land of Midian. There he became the father of two sons."

Jehad Watch Latest Reports And News
Turkey: Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” attacks church with Molotov cocktail
Australia PM: Only effective defense against terror persuading people God doesn’t demand death to infidel
US officials decline to meet with Muslim Brotherhood delegation to Washington
Virginia: Muslim honor student admits guilt in helping another Muslim join the Islamic State
After Pamela Geller is Silenced, Who’s Next?
UK: Refugee from Iraq jailed for “Twitter terrorism”
Pennsylvania school officials schooled on Islam at mosque, at taxpayer expense
NYPD aims to ramp up recruitment of Muslims

Killings of Syrian Druze draws wide condemnation
Wassim Mroueh/The Daily Star/Jun. 12, 2015
BEIRUT: Lebanon’s Druze Spiritual Council will hold an emergency session Friday to draw up a response to the killing of 20 community members in northwest Syria by the Al-Qaeda affiliate, a massacre which sparked widespread condemnation.
Speaking to The Daily Star Thursday, ministerial sources from the Progressive Socialist Party said MP Walid Jumblatt would announce the outcome of the meeting which will convene in the Druze Sect House in Verdun in the afternoon.
The Nusra Front killed at least 20 Druze civilians in the village of Qalb Lozeh Wednesday, in the Jabal al-Summaq region of the northwest province of Idlib.
The attack was the deadliest yet to target the sect, which has been split between supporters and opponents of the regime since the Syrian crisis began in March 2011.
Jumblatt, Lebanon’s most influential Druze leader, has warned against incitement.
“Any inciting rhetoric will not be beneficial, and you should remember that Bashar Assad’s policies pushed Syria into this chaos,” he wrote on Twitter.
Jumblatt, who backs the Syrian opposition, also called for reconciliation between the Druze and Sunnis of the southern Deraa province.
In August, Druze villagers from the southern province of Swaida fought deadly clashes with Nusra-backed Bedouins from nearby Deraa.
Jumblatt received phone calls condemning the massacre from Speaker Nabih Berri, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, former Prime Minister Fouad Sinora and Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdel-Latif Derian.
The PSP said in a statement late Wednesday that contacts Jumblatt has made with Syrian opposition groups and regional powers have led to joint efforts to protect residents of the Druze villages in Idlib, who it said have supported the Syrian revolution from the start.
The statement also said that reports that the residents of Qalb Lozeh were slaughtered by Nusra were baseless. It alleged that the killings were part of a dispute between people from the village and Nusra militants, who tried to enter the house of a man they considered pro-regime. The incident then degenerated into violence.
Berri condemned Wednesday’s killings in a phone call to Druze Spiritual leader Sheikh Naim Hasan and a series of Lebanese Druze figures including Jumblatt, MP Talal Arslan, former Minister Wi’am Wahhab, and former MP Faisal Dawoud.
Prime Minister Tammam Salam said that Qalb Lozeh’s “savage crime” represented “blatant aggression against a major component of the brotherly Syrian people, and showed once again the savagery of the forces of darkness.”
Hariri also condemned the Qalb Lozeh massacre. “The worst [situation] the Syrian revolution could fall into, is [for rebels] to volunteer in combat missions that have no goal but to offer free services to the Bashar Assad regime,” he said in a statement.
“The incidents that took place in the village of Qalb Lozeh in Idlib province are a serious example of the outrageous behavior that harms the Syrians, their revolution and their victories, and gives the regime and its followers an opportunity to exploit the mistakes of part of the opposition.” Hariri called on members of the Druze community “to follow the noble patriotic stance” of Jumblatt, “who has been warning for years against the attempts of the Syrian regime to draw sects and communities into its senseless wars, using them as human shields to defend its political entity.”Hezbollah also strongly condemned the “savage crime” committed by Nusra Front “gangs.”
“Patience and unity are required more than ever before in this difficult time, in the face of projects to instigate divisions between people of the same country,” read a statement released by the party.“Was it expected that these terrorist, deviant groups, who have links with the enemies of the nation, will have an attitude different than this one, which stems from a doctrine based on killing and bloodshed?”Sheikh Hasan condemned the killings in Idlib, calling for “awareness and responsibility to avoid the repetition of such incidents,” and said the Druze should not to respond to attempts at incitement.Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea also denounced the killings. “The regional states supporting the Syrian opposition should intervene to set limits for groups taking such action,” he said.
But Wahhab, an ally of Assad, urged members of the community in Syria to create an armed force to defend themselves. “[The Druze in Syria] are ready to defeat the terrorists, but what they lack is arms. Lebanon’s Druze are ready to help, we are ready to form an army of 200,000 fighters to defend the Druze,” Wahhab said in a televised speech, urging Assad to provide arms to the community. He also threatened the Nusra Front and its allies who have attacked the Druze in Syria.“The people of Deraa are our brothers; my problem is with the criminal foreigners who came to Syria. Anyone who deals with the Nusra Front is unwelcome in Lebanon ... Whoever kills us in Idlib, we will kill him in Lebanon. We will not allow any Nusra Front member to stay.”

A new Shiite-Maronite pact cannot work
Michael Young/The Daily Star/June. 11, 2015
How were Aounists supposed to interpret the remarks of Hezbollah’s deputy secretary-general, Naim Qassem, Monday? While in the Bekaa Valley, Qassem declared that “either Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun is elected as president, or the [election] will be delayed indefinitely.”The Aounist rank and file will have welcomed this unconditional backing for the general, which followed similar statements of praise from Qassem last Saturday. But those who are more perspicacious may have concluded, somewhat differently, that if Aoun’s candidacy has become the subject of Hezbollah brinksmanship, then the general’s chances of becoming a consensus candidate are negligible. Aside from the tactical calculations behind Hezbollah’s support for Aoun, which may be designed to maintain a vacuum in the presidency at a time of uncertainty in Syria, there appears to be a longer-term objective. It is that if the Syrian regime falls, Hezbollah’s only way to protect itself in Lebanon against Sunni triumphalism is to build a durable alliance with the Christians.
In effect what we could be witnessing today is an effort to lay the groundwork for a new “national pact,” replicating the one between Maronites and Sunnis that became the cornerstone of independent Lebanon. What Hezbollah seeks to do is protect its weapons in an environment in which its Alawite ally in Damascus is gone, and where Sunni empowerment will lead to demands against the party that can no longer be resolved through a recourse to violence as in May 2008.
Qassem and the Hezbollah leadership apparently feel that their endorsement of Aoun will help achieve two things: It will heighten Christian goodwill toward the party, as it will seem that Hezbollah wants a “strong” Maronite president; and it will rally Christians to the Shiite side against a resurgent Lebanese and Syrian Sunni community that, many Christians fear, is likely to end up being controlled by extremists.
Hezbollah’s exploitation of Christian fears to rally the community against the Sunnis is worrisome. However, recently at the 11th Congress of Sayyedat al-Jabal, Christian representatives, backed by the Maronite Church, resisted this trend. The gathering came out with a very clear statement that “the protection of the Christians is not achieved through an alliance of minorities.” Samir Franjieh recalled that the Arab League had affirmed that pluralism was the only weapon against terrorism. This view was indirectly echoed in another of the conference’s resolutions, namely that “the majority is as much a victim of terrorism as are the minorities.”But how widespread are such opinions? Even Patriarch Bechara Rai agreed with those holding the contrary view in 2011, when he approved of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria, seeing it as a barrier against Islamism. The patriarch had made a hasty statement then that he must now regret: “It’s true that the Syrian Baath regime is an extreme and dictatorial regime, but there are many others like it in the Arab world. All regimes in the Arab world have Islam as a state religion, except for Syria. It stands out for not saying it is an Islamic state. ... The closest thing to democracy [in the Arab world] is Syria.”
Rai’s foolishness aside, thanks to Assad Syria’s minorities, Christian or Muslim, have never been so existentially threatened. The belief that Hezbollah represents a credible protective barrier for Christians is nonsense. The party and Iran have barely been able to defend their strategic ally in Damascus, so those who imagine they could do so for the Christians of Lebanon really must buy a newspaper.
Hezbollah has never understood, nor sought to understand, Lebanon’s power-sharing agreement and the principles underlying the country’s consociational system. Everything for the party is measured by a yardstick of power relations. All notions of compromise and coexistence are accepted only inasmuch as they enhance, or prevent the decline of, Hezbollah’s power. Policies that might reinforce coexistence are rejected if they clash with the party’s assessment of its interests. Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria is a perfect example.
If Christians are confident about building up a foundational alliance with the Shiites – implicitly directed against the Sunni community – on the basis of Hezbollah’s worldview, then they had better prepare for a long period of sectarian conflict. The outcome in Syria remains unclear, but only a commitment by all Lebanese communities to coexistence and compromise will ward off the sectarian repercussions of the war in Syria.
Security for Lebanon’s Christians comes from pursuing close relations with both Shiites and Sunnis. Internal unity is equally essential, and the recent reconciliation between Aoun and Samir Geagea was a good start, even if nothing was agreed. Without a common plan for communal survival, Christians will be unable to navigate the rough seas ahead.
The belief in a new Maronite-Shiite national pact to replace that of 1943 reflects a misinterpretation of Lebanese history. Just as the National Pact before Independence failed to prepare for the rise of the Shiite community, a Maronite-Shiite pact would only ignore the regeneration of the Sunni community. Successful social contracts, particularly in mixed sectarian societies such as our own, are based on general principles, and cannot be constantly tailored to adapt to shifting political realities.
If Hezbollah wants to protect the Shiites, then it must accept that a new reality is taking form in Lebanon and all around it. The party cannot enlist its community in perpetual war against its surroundings and hope to win. Nor should Christians go along with such a mad, suicidal project. For once Christians have a key role to play as conciliators between Sunnis and Shiites. That’s their best safeguard against elimination.
Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR. He tweets @BeirutCalling.

U.S. Blacklists 'Key Hizbullah Support Network'
Naharnet/May 11/15/The U.S. Treasury placed on its sanctions blacklist Wednesday three Lebanese men and companies they are tied to, calling them part of a "key Hizbullah support network."The Treasury placed asset freezes and restrictions for doing business on real estate businessman Adham Tabaja and his al-Inmaa group of companies, Kassem Hejeij and Husayn Ali Faour, and the company he manages, Car Care Center. It said Tabaja is a member of Hizbullah, which is officially labeled a "terrorist organization" by Washington, and that al-Inmaa is used by Hizbullah for investment and holding properties. It said that al-Inmaa Engineering and Contracting has recently obtained oil and construction projects in Iraq that "provide both financial support and organizational infrastructure to Hizbullah."Hejeij, the Treasury said, works with Tabaja and also provides financial support to Hizbullah. It said that Faour is a member of Hizbullah's operations unit Islamic Jihad, and the company he runs, Car Care Center, helps Hizbullah with transportation. The Treasury said the sanctioned individuals and companies are examples of Hizbullah's "continued exploitation of the legitimate commercial sector for financial, organizational, and material support... which enable the group to carry out acts of terrorism."Agence France Presse

Salam from Yarze: Security Plans Yielded Security, We Defeated Strife through Military
Naharnet/May 11/15/Prime Minister Tammam Salam hailed on Thursday the role of the military institution in achieving stability and security in Lebanon, while saluting its ongoing efforts to protect the country against foreign threats. He said: “The security plans have yielded stability in Lebanon and we succeeded in defeating strife through the military.” He made his remarks from the Defense Ministry in Yarze where he met with Minister Samir Moqbel, Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji, and other military officials. “We are facing several challenges and have been doing so for years,” added the premier. “Our success is the product of great efforts. Our enemy has devised terrorist plots against us, but we have thwarted them,” he declared. “We succeeded in uprooting all plots to create strife among us,” stated Salam, while highlighting that Lebanon has faced and still faces the threat of Israel. “It has never relented in plotting against us,” he said of the Jewish state. Addressing the situation along Lebanon's eastern border, Salam remarked: “The army is combating threats along the border with all possible means.”“It knows how to act on the ground and how to defend the nation,” he stressed. Moreover, the prime minister emphasized: “We are seeking to supply the military with modern weapons to help it protect the border.” “The atmosphere within the military institution itself contributed to its success, whereby it has not been tainted by sectarianism,” he explained. “I will not spare any effort to support the army,” he added. Lebanon's eastern borders have in recent months been facing the threat of extremists from Syria. In the past few weeks, clashes have erupted between Hizbullah fighters and Syrian regime forces in al-Qalamoun against extremist groups.There have been growing concerns that the jihadists would spill over into Lebanon, particularly the northeastern border town of Arsal, where they took hostage a number of Lebanese soldiers and policemen when they overran the town in August 2014.

Qahwaji Warns of Cabinet Standstill, Says Situation in Arsal Stable
Naharnet/May 11/15/Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji warned Thursday that the paralysis of the cabinet harms the country's security as ministers should continue to endorse decisions to fortify the situation in Lebanon. Qahwaji's remarks came during a meeting with a delegation from al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc Wednesday. He stressed that the situation in the northeastern border town of Arsal is stable, noting that the residents of the town are staunch supporters of the army. The army chief soothed fears over battles between jihadists and Hizbullah fighters backed by Syrian army troops, saying: “Clashes are on the Syrian side of the outskirts.”“Army units and intelligence information didn't observe any battles on the outskirts adjacent to Arsal yet,” sources close to the delegation quoted Qahwaji as saying in comments to al-Mustaqbal newspaper. He pointed out that the army will continue to conduct patrols in the village and on high alert according to the military estimates. Hizbullah has succeeded recently in achieving gains against al-Qaida-affiliate al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant on the outskirts of Syria's al-Qalamoun, compelling fighters to retreat from their positions. The party insists it is fighting in Syria to prevent extremist groups from entering Lebanon. On Wednesday, Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah declared that al-Nusra Front has suffered a “major defeat” at the hands of his group's fighters in the outskirts of the northeastern border town of Arsal, announcing that the battle against the IS group has started in the border region. The Mustaqbal delegation so far met with Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Tammam Salam, former President Michel Suleiman, outgoing Kataeb party chief Amin Gemayel, and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea. The bloc aims at rallying political parties against Free Patriotic Movement's decision to paralyze cabinet if security and military appointments failed to take place and to discuss the situation in Arsal.

Interpretations of Salam’s visit to the military differ
Hasan Lakkis| The Daily Star/June. 12, 2015
Politicians were divided over Prime Minister Tammam Salam’s visit to the Defense Ministry in Yarze, which occurred against the backdrop of Gen. Michel Aoun’s campaign to unseat Army chief Gen. Jean Kahwagi. Aoun and his Change and Reform parliamentary bloc consider extending Kahwagi’s term illegitimate and illegal.March 14 MPs said that Salam’s visit, “though overdue,” affirmed that the extension of Kahwagi’s term would be lawful. The coalition added that Salam’s visit fell within his responsibilities to support the Army and bolster the military’s morale. They said the visit could also be interpreted as a clear message from Salam that the extension of Kahwagi’s term by two years is a settled matter, considering the absence of an agreement over the appointment of his successor.
Over the past two days, several ministers have signaled their opposition to appointing a successor to Kahwagi before the election of a new president, March 14 representatives say. The opposing ministers include eight from the Consultative Gathering – which includes ministers affiliated with former President Michel Sleiman, Kataeb Party ministers, Telecommunications Minister Boutros Harb and Tourism Minister Michel Pharaon – two from the Amal Movement, and others from the Future Movement such as Salam and Environment Minister Mohammad Machnouk. Representatives for March 14 say this further supports the Future Movement’s demand that a new military chief cannot be appointed before the election of a president.
They also described Salam’s visit as a show of support for Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Samir Moqbel, after Free Patriotic Movement leader Aoun publicly defamed him and threatenedto withdraw the confidence granted to him by the Change and Reform bloc in Parliament, and warned him against issuing a decree to extend Kahwagi’s term.Conversely, March 8 MPs say Salam must lead by consensus to preserve the stability of his government. They note that he is no longer as accommodating with Aoun and Hezbollah as he was and they point out that Interior Minister Nouhad Machnouk’s tone when dealing with the FPM leader has especially toughened.
March 8 MPs did not refute that that Salam’s Yarze visit was directed toward Hezbollah, which they say has completed “military victories” along the border, protecting Christian Lebanese areas. They say Salam is trying to assert that it is the military that protects the country, and the government supports the Army in its endeavors, as reflected in the government’s policy statement. The March 8 MPs – and especially the Christians among them – expressed their displeasure with Salam’s visit, saying that it would not placate Aoun’s enmity toward Kahwagi, but would further provoke it. They say the visit does not change the premise of Aoun’s objection: that the extension of Kahwagi’s term is illegal and will remain illegal because he has served 44 years in the military, the maximum length permitted.
The MPs had hoped that Salam’s visit would be a farewell to Kahwagi to voice appreciation for his military service, saying this would pave the way for the appointment of a new Army chief in accordance with the law.
March 8 MPs offered some praise for Salam’s speech at Yarze, but said it remained wanting of an acknowledgement of Hezbollah’s sacrifice to confront terrorism. They say Hezbollah has paid in martyrs and blood to return the border areas to security.

Jbeil is crowned Arab Tourism Capital
The Daily Star/June. 12, 2015
BEIRUT: Jbeil’s selection as Arab Tourism Capital for 2016 was officially announced by Tourism Minister Michel Pharaon at a news conference Thursday. The title recognizes the efforts Jbeil has made to attract new visitors and officials hope it will draw even more to the historic Lebanese city. Over the past few years, Jbeil has become a major economic hub and tourist destination. People from across Lebanon and the Arab world visit the city, one of world’s oldest. Its new title crowns a series of efforts made by its citizens and municipality.
The city made headlines at Christmas with a spectacular 25.5-meter-high golden tree. The elaborate display drew international attention and was mentioned in The Wall Street Journal. The buzz drew visitors from across Lebanon, giving the city an economic boost.
But Jbeil did not gain its current reputation overnight. The city’s costal location and its mixture of traditional and modern attractions contribute to its appeal. In addition to the Byblos ruins, the city has become known for its refined seafront restaurants and vibrant nightlife.
In summer, the Byblos International Festival draws big names from the music industry to Lebanon to perform. This year’s festival runs from July 13 to Aug. 18 and includes such performers as John Legend, French singer Mireille Mathieu and Irish pop-rock band The Script.
Visitors can currently enjoy the city’s charms at the Byblos en Blanc et Rose wine festival, which runs through June 13.

Sami Gemayel set to win Kataeb presidency as opponents object
Wassim Mroueh| The Daily Star/June. 12, 2015
BEIRUT: MP Sami Gemayel is set to be elected as president of the Kataeb Party Sunday, transferring the leadership of one of Lebanon’s oldest political parties to the third generation of a family that has already produced two Lebanese presidents. The polls will take place at the Kataeb headquarters in Saifi on the last day of the party’s 30th General Conference, which kicks off Friday at the Le Royal Hotel in Dbayyeh. Despite the overwhelming support Gemayel enjoys among rank and file members of the Kataeb, he will not run unopposed. Pierre Atallah, a party official from the Marjayoun-Hasbaya district, has insisted that he will stand for the post as well. Although victory is highly unlikely, Atallah said he is running in order to highlight the need to “reorient” the political performance of the Kataeb and other Christian parties. Last week, Gemayel, 34, declared his candidacy and presented his electoral program during a ceremony in his hometown of Bikfaya, two weeks after his father, current party chief Amine Gemayel, announced he would not seek another term.
Sami Gemayel was elected to Parliament in 2009. His father Amine, Lebanon’s president from 1982 till 1988, has led the party since 2007. Sami is also the grandson of Pierre Gemayel, who founded the Kataeb in 1936. It would become the most influential Christian party during Lebanon’s Civil War. Sami Gemayel is also the nephew of assassinated President-elect Bachir Gemayel. Speaking to The Daily Star, Atallah said his candidacy is partly aimed at protesting Gemayel’s inheriting the leadership of the party from his father. “Let it be a transition of power through elections,” said Atallah, who also works as a journalist for An-Nahar.
Atallah said that if voters chose Gemayel, they must hold him accountable for his mistakes once his term ends rather than blindly re-electing him because he’s a Gemayel. “I will continue my candidacy to prove the need for an actual political life within Christian parties. It is unacceptable that five [leaders] continue to decide for around 1.2 million Christians in this country.” “We don’t see any of them asking the public what they really want ... even party supporters follow their leaders like sheep. This situation should not continue.”
“People are frustrated,” he added. Atallah lamented that officials and supporters “worshiped” their leaders, and said they were abandoning their duties within the party. “[They say], ‘We don’t decide, the leader decides for us, we don’t talk, the leader talks for us.’”“Look at Hezbollah, it is a successful model in terms of how it manages its social and military affairs along with its political battle, and in how it mobilizes its people.”
Atallah said his electoral program centers on restoring the independent status of the Kataeb Party by withdrawing it from the March 14 coalition besides reorienting its policy. He said that through its presence in the coalition, the Kataeb Party was appeasing its allies at the expense of its supporters. Other party officials took a different approach in their opposition, challenging the legality of the conference and Gemayel’s eligibility for the post. Earlier this week, Michel Jabbour filed a challenge with Nadim Zwein, the judge of urgent matters in Beirut. Speaking to The Daily Star, Jabbour said Gemayel’s candidacy violated the Kataeb Party’s bylaws and the Law of Associations, which regulates political parties in Lebanon. Jabbour said that according to the party’s bylaws, one has to be a party member for at least 15 years in order to run for its presidency. He noted that Gemayel took the party oath and became a member only in late 2007. “But when he joined the party, the Kataeb said that Sami Gemayel had the right to seniority and that he was considered to have taken the oath in 2000,” Jabbour said. In 2000, Gemayel filed a request to join the Kataeb Party. “They [Gemayels] consider the Kataeb Party to be a family legacy which they own. But it is actually the property of the people, of tens of thousands of martyrs,” Jabbour said.
He said that even if Sami Gemayel is considered to have joined the party in 2000, this itself would violate Article Five of the Law of Associations, which stipulates that anyone who files a request to join an association must be at least 20 years old.
Gemayel filed his request a few months before his 20th birthday in December 2000. Serge Dagher, a member of the Kataeb politburo, said that Jabbour’s arguments lacked legal grounds. He conceded that Gemayel filed a request to join the party in 2000 and took the oath in 2007. But he explained that following the reconciliation between former Kataeb Party leader Karim Pakradouni and Amine Gemayel in 2005, the party reversed a decision that had decreed that those who filed a request to join the Kataeb would only become party members after taking the oath. He said that the earlier decision had been influenced by Syrian tutelage over Lebanon.
Dagher added that Lebanon was a signatory to a U.N. document by which Lebanese are allowed to join political parties at the age of 18. “If we want to follow Mr. Jabbour’s logic, then Amine Gemayel, Munir Hajj and Karim Pakradouni were not legal presidents,” Dagher said, noting that they joined the Kataeb Party at the ages of 15, 16 and 15 respectively. “Mr. Jabbour lives in a totally different world. The challenge, just like the person who filed it, is of no real value.”Jabbour’s challenge was rejected late Thursday, but he was not alone is contesting the legitimacy of Gemayel’s candidacy. Antoine Nehme, Judge of Urgent Matters in Metn, had already rejected a similar challenge filed by former Kataeb official Issa Nahhas. Dagher disputed the idea that Gemayel was simply inheriting the presidency from his father, and said the party had proven that it was not ruled by the political dynasty. “Following the death of Pierre Gemayel [in 1984], Elie Karami, George Saade, Mounir al-Hajj and Karim Pakradouni [all] headed the party,” he said.
Dagher also noted that Sami Gemayel possessed the qualifications to become president of the Kataeb. “Look at his CV. He began the struggle when he was 16. He took part in demonstrations against the Syrian presence in Lebanon and was beaten up by [security forces],” Dagher said. He also pointed out that of the 90 draft laws proposed by lawmakers elected in 2009, 28 were put forward by Gemayel. “He will be elected rather than inherit the post,” Dagher concluded.
While the battle for the Kataeb presidency is almost predetermined, competition for the party’s other leadership posts is a much more heated issue. Veteran Kataeb officials Joseph Abu Khakil and Tannous Qerdahi are running for the post of first deputy-president, and the battle for the second deputy president pits former Minister Salim Sayegh against Sassine Sassine and Roukoz Zogheib. Forty candidates are running for the 16 seats of the politburo. The electoral body is comprised of 400 district representatives.
Though he voiced support for Gemayel, Dagher also praised Atallah’s candidacy, saying he backed his call for real elections and more political discourse within the party. “We all think like Pierre. People are evaluating the election experience at the Kataeb Party. Can you tell me of another election experience by a party in Lebanon?”

Lebanon safeguards region’s cultural heritage
Elise Knutsen| The Daily Star/June. 12, 2015
BEIRUT: As militants and opportunists take advantage of regional chaos to loot antiquities, Lebanon is filling warehouses with trafficked artifacts, keeping the priceless objects under lock and key until they can be returned to their countries of origin. The international cooperation, which has been going on for many years, has taken on new importance as the conflicts in Iraq and Syria threaten to destroy cultural heritage across the region, Culture Minister Raymond Areiji explained. Seized by Lebanese security forces at the airport, ports and at the land border with Syria, trafficked objects are sent to the Directorate General of Antiquities, part of the Culture Ministry. Seized objects are carefully cataloged and stored in warehouses under the protection of armed guards.
“We have many warehouses. For security purposes we don’t usually say where, but we have several warehouses and they are well guarded.”Lebanon’s vigilance in the face of widespread looting and trafficking of cultural goods is a rare point of light in an otherwise bleak regional panorama. Aside from killing untold numbers of civilians, the jihadi group ISIS has destroyed ancient relics in Iraq and Syria which it perceives as idolatrous. According to a report issued by the inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force earlier this year, ISIS also sells stolen antiquities and taxes traffickers who smuggle the artifacts through territory controlled by the group. Last month, ISIS took control of Palmyra, an ancient city and UNESCO World Heritage Site that has a history of inhabitation dating back almost 10,000 years.The smugglers who traffic antiquities through Lebanon are “criminals and they are participating in one way or another in financing terrorism,” Areiji said.ISIS is not the only group engaged in looting, however. According to FATF, 90 percent of Syria’s cultural artifacts are located in areas affected by the ongoing civil war, and “large-scale” smuggling has emerged in many areas. “Many international [smuggling] mafias, they work now in Syria,” said Ahmad Deeb, Syria’s director of museum affairs on a recent trip to Beirut.
Despite the precarious situation Syrians and their cultural heritage face today, Deeb was in Beirut under more auspicious circumstances: The Lebanese authorities have recently intercepted a number of stolen artifacts believed to be of Syrian provenance.
“We’ll look at the objects to determine if they are [genuine] or not, and return these objects back to Syria,” he said.
A number of religious icons stolen from the Syrian village of Maaloula were among the items found. Dating back a few hundred years, the items are not archaeological pieces but, according to Areiji, the icons are important to preserve. “We’re not confining our actions to antiquities,” he said. “We are also dealing with objects that I might consider of patrimonial [value].”Aside from the Maaloula icons, Areiji said that everything from paintings to “windows from houses in Homs and Aleppo” will be repatriated to Syria in due time. “We consider these things to belong to the cultural heritage of another country,” Areiji said.
The icons, kept in a padlocked basement room in the Directorate of Antiquities, include an 18th-century wood cutting and an old photograph of a clerical gathering at Maaloula. “I don’t know who the thieves are. I don’t want to know,” said Anne-Marie Maila-Afeiche, the curator of the National Museum in Beirut, gazing at the recovered objects. “For me, it’s just that we had the chance to help,” she explained. “We will do whatever we have to do in order to give them back.”Afeiche said that she receives notices from Interpol “every other day” about the theft of cultural goods from Iraq and Syria. This is not the first time items stolen from Syria during the civil war have been returned after being seized in Lebanon. Several months ago, Deeb traveled to Beirut and returned to Syria with 69 artifacts, including ancient mosaics and stone relics taken from Apamea, an archaeological site in Hama province.
While many stolen antiquities seized in Lebanon have been identified and returned, Areiji said that establishing the origin of artifacts is a difficult task. Often objects that appear were excavated illegally during the chaos of war. “We have a lot of antiquities, but we are not able to determine [their origin],” Areiji explained. “It’s a big problem.”
Items of indeterminate origin are kept in Lebanese warehouses until more identifying information arises. The culture minister and the director-general of antiquities work in close collaboration with their colleagues in Iraq and Syria to allow for the identification and repatriation of cultural goods. The collaboration, Areiji stressed, is strictly a matter of preserving culture. “For me, it’s not a political matter,” he said of working with Syrian and Iraqi counterparts. The safeguarding and ultimate repatriation of artifacts is part of what Areiji calls “cultural resistance” against those who wish to destroy the region’s history and diversity. Having suffered from more than 15 years of civil strife, Lebanon is well suited to shield cultural artifacts from the scourge of war, Maila-Afeiche said. “We learned the hard way,” she added.

Businessman denies Hezbollah links
Osama Habib| The Daily Star/June. 12, 2015
BEIRUT: A prominent businessman and banker accused by U.S. authorities of financing Hezbollah has denied the allegations and promised to follow the case with his lawyers in Washington. “I can assure you Kassem Hejeij has no direct or indirect links with Hezbollah and we were surprised that the U.S. Treasury Department applied sanctions on him,” a lawyer and a close associate of Hejeij told The Daily Star Thursday. The U.S. Treasury Department Wednesday targeted what it described as a key Hezbollah support network by designating Hezbollah member Adham Tabaja, his company Al-Inmaa Group for Tourism Works, and its subsidiaries, as well as Lebanese businessman Hejeij and Hezbollah Islamic Jihad member Husayn Ali Faour, as parties providing support and services to Hezbollah. The U.S. authorities said that all of the three individuals have provided support for Hezbollah, which Washington has officially labeled a terrorist organization. “Today’s actions underscore the direct ties between Hezbollah’s commercial and terrorist activities, as well as the group’s continued exploitation of the legitimate commercial sector for financial, organizational and material support – from vehicles to investment and construction services – which enable the group to carry out acts of terrorism,” the statement by the U.S. Treasury said.
But the lawyer said Hejeij plans to follow the case closely, appoint lawyers and collect all the account information and data he has to prove his innocence in Washington.
Hejeij is the chairman of Middle East and Africa Bank and owns hotels, beach resorts and prime properties in Beirut and the south.Sources said Hejeij amassed his fortune in Africa and invested part of his wealth in hotels and real estate.Although U.S. officials did not name the bank in its sanctions order, the fact that Hejeij is the lender’s chairman has raised some questions about its future. “The chairman does not know or have any relations with Husayn Ali Faour, who was also named by the U.S. authorities as a supporter of Hezbollah. But as far as Adham Tabaja is concerned he had an account in the bank. But we removed his account from our bank when his name emerged in the report of the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control,” the lawyer said. He added that Tabaja’s name was not previously on any list of individuals with ties to terrorist groups.
“We always doublecheck the names of any new client in the bank and we follow the basic rule of Know Your Customer procedure. We also deploy all the latest compliance procedures to determine if depositors had previous records,” the lawyers said.
The Middle East and Africa Bank has assets close to $1.7 billion and recorded a profit of almost $20 million in 2014, according to the bank.But a leading banker told The Daily Star that many banks have decided to stop dealing with MEAB in U.S. dollars. “We can’t take any chances these days. I think the U.S. correspondent banks will also stop dealing with the bank,” he added. However, the banker believed that MEAB was not in any immediate threat and it could still conduct business and transactions, but only in Lebanese currency.
The lawyer dismissed any possibility that MEAB would be forced to sell or close its business in the future.
“We have been assured by Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh that MEAB operations in Lebanon are sound and that there is [no] intention to take any action against this bank,” the lawyer said. He also ridiculed claims by the Office of Foreign Assets Control that Jejeiji had financed Hezbollah. “Hejeij is a smart businessman and is aware of the fact that this party is branded as a terrorist group by the Americans and for this reason he will never have any connection with them,” the lawyer argued.He expressed confidence that the U.S. would eventually remove Hejeij’s name from the list once American authorities see all the documents and accounts the bank has.

Departing Fletcher lauds Lebanese resilience
The Daily Star/12, 2015/BEIRUT: Departing British Ambassador Tom Fletcher lauded Lebanon’s “resilience” amid regional threats, underscoring London’s continued support to the country. “I have often spoken about a vision of Lebanon 2020, the Lebanon that you are building. I predict that people will look back in 2020 and ask themselves how it was possible for Lebanon to have come through these years of regional meltdown. The answer will be clear: Never underestimate the resilience of the Lebanese people,” Fletcher said during an embassy event Wednesday to mark Queen Elizabeth’s birthday. “And I hope too they will also say that in this time Britain was on the side of the Lebanese people. Giving the Army the training and equipment to match their courage. Giving those pupils the schoolbooks to match their aspiration. Giving those businesses the networks to match their ambition. And above all, nourishing that hope amid the rubble,” he added. The event, held at BIEL, was attended by Defense Minister Samir Moqbel, representing Prime Minister Tammam Salam; MP Yassin Jaber, representing Speaker Nabih Berri; and Gen. Maroun Hitti, representing Army Commander Gen. Jean Kahwagi. The speech marked one of the last public appearances Fletcher will make before he concludes his ambassadorship to the country. “But, I will always be an ambassador for Lebanon,” he said.Fletcher presented the Admiralty Prize to Lt. Christian Fahed and Lt. Alaa Amro, which was accepted by Hitti. Headteachers Victor Bitar of north Lebanon and Ihsan Araji of the Bekaa Valley were also awarded for ensuring that all children received a quality education.

Jumblat: Only Cabinet Concerned with Appointments of Civil Servants
Naharnet/May 11/15/Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat stressed Thursday that the cabinet is the sole authority concerned with the appointment of civil servants. Jumblat criticized some journalists without naming them, considering they have “a wide imagination.”He reaffirmed via his Twitter account that he backs the Lebanese army and the state's security agencies. The Druze chief has been seeking with Speaker Nabih Berri to prevent cabinet paralysis over the appointment of high-ranking security and military officials. The government plunged in a further crisis last week when it failed to agree on the appointments controversy. Free Patriotic Movement chief MP Michel Aoun has bluntly rejected any attempt to extend the terms of the officials. He has been lobbying for political consensus on the appointment of Commando Regiment chief Brig. Gen. Chamel Roukoz, his son-in-law, as army chief as part of a package for the appointment of other top security officers. Roukoz's tenure ends in October while the term of army commander Gen. Jean Qahwaji expires at the end of September.

3 wounded in Beirut from Hezbollah funeral gunfire
The Daily Star/June 11, 2015 |
BEIRUT: Stray gunfire from a funeral for a Hezbollah fighter in Beirut’s southern suburbs wounded three civilians Wednesday, a security source told The Daily Star. An eight year-old Syrian boy identified as Mounir Hazini was shot in the head by one of the stray bullets in the Beirut neighborhood of Qasqas. The source said that the boy, who is currently in a coma, is in critical condition. A 15 year-old Syrian national, Afif Hussein al-Hasan, was wounded in his leg in the Cola area while a Lebanese national, Jihad Naim, 25, was shot in the thigh in the southern suburb of Bir Hassan. Over the past week, rocket-propelled grenades were fired twice in Beirut's southern suburbs during the funerals of Hezbollah fighters who were killed in the clashes with jihadis along Lebanon’s eastern border with Syria. The injuries from stray bullets come four months after Hezbollah’s leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah urged his followers to avoid all gunfire during speeches and events. “Considering the legal and Islamic prohibitions, the harm it causes to people and how it attenuates the [meaning of the] occasion, I address you with all insistence and call on you ... to totally avoid gunfire,” a letter signed by Nasrallah and released by his party’s media office said. He called on all party leaders to help implement this decision and prevent any celebratory gunfire.

Israeli President, Rivlin expresses concern for Syria's Druze in meeting with US military chief
Reuters/Ynetnews/Published: 06.10.15/ Israel News
Druze in Syrian Golan are in danger from Islamic State, Nusra Front, who consider them heretics.
President Reuven Rivlin expressed his concern to the United States on Wednesday about the fate of the Druze minority in Syria, saying around 500,000 of them were under threat from Islamist militants in an area near the Israeli border. Israel's Druze, some of whom have reached the senior echelons of Israel's military and the government, have been calling for help on behalf of their brethren in Syria, both at home and abroad. "What is going on just now is intimidation and threat to the very existence of half a million Druze on the Mount of Druze which is very close to the Israeli border," Rivlin said after a meeting with General Martin Dempsey, the US military's top officer. The southern region near the border with Jordan and Israel is one of the areas where President Bashar Assad has recently lost ground to insurgents in the civil war. Groups active in the south include the non-jihadist rebels of the 'Southern Front' and al-Qaeda's Syrian arm, the Nusra Front. Islamic State has also been targeting Syrian army positions in Sweida province, the Druze heartland.
Members of the Druze sect, an off-shoot of Islam, are spread across Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Israel and Syria. The puritanical school of Sunni Islam espoused by al-Qaeda and Islamic State views the Druze as heretics.
A US official said arming the Druze did not come up in Dempsey's discussions in Israel, although Syria had topped the agenda. "It's the Druze who are asking everyone to arm the Druze. The Druze of Israel have been raising it with Israel, with the US, with Jordan - everyone," the official said. The Druze have historically professed loyalty to local rulers and in Syria have backed the family of President Bashar Assad in his war against the rebels, both non-jihadist and Islamist. Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt has urged the Druze in southern Syria to become allies with other communities in order to protect themselves. Only "reconciliation with the people of Houran" - a reference to areas where rebel groups captured a major base from the Syrian military on Tuesday - could protect them from "dangers", he said on Twitter. Mainstream Syrian rebel groups said on Wednesday they had launched an offensive on the military airport of Thalaa, west of Sweida, which they say government forces use to bomb villages and towns across rebel-controlled areas in the south.

Tawhid Party chief Wiam Wahhab calls for Druze force to fight Syria rebels after massacre
The Daily Star/June 11, 2015
BEIRUT: Tawhid Party chief Wiam Wahhab Thursday urged Druze to form an armed force to defend themselves after at least 20 members of their community were killed by Nusra Front militants in northwest Syria. “We will not accept to sell Druze blood!” Wahhab, a former minister, said in an angry televised speech. “[The Druze in Syria] are ready to defeat the terrorists, but what they lack is arms. Lebanon’s Druze are ready to help, we are ready to form an army of 200 fighters to defend the Druze.” Wahhab’s comments come one day after at least 20 Druze men and women were killed by militants from Al-Qaeda’s affiliate in the village of Qalb Lawzah, in Idlib province.
Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt, who is politically opposed to Wahhab and staunchly supports Syria's rebels, said a Druze religious council would hold and emergency meeting Friday on the incident. “Any inciting rhetoric will not be beneficial, and you should remember that Bashar Assad’s policies pushed Syria into this chaos,” Jumblatt wrote on Twitter. Jumblatt also called for reconciliation between the Druze and the Sunni communities in the southern Deraa province. In August, Druze villagers from the southern province of Swaida fought deadly clashes with Nusra-backed Bedouins from nearby Deraa. Jumblatt has since intensified his anti-Assad stance, calling on Druze to join Syria's rebels.
In his Twitter remarks Thursday, Jumblatt cautioned political figures against attacking the rebels, fearing that criticism of their actions would lead to more violence against Druze in Idlib.But Wahhab lashed out at the Nusra Front and its allies who attack Druze in Syria's northwestern and southern regions. “The people of Deraa are our brothers, but my problem is with the criminal foreigners who came to Syria,” he said. “Anyone who deals with the Nusra Front is unwelcome in Lebanon... Whoever kills us in Idlib, we will kill him in Lebanon. We will not allow any Nusra Front member to stay.” Wahhab called on Assad to arm Druze communities in Syria, especially those of Swaida. “Swaida needs weapons, and the Syrian state is responsible for any delay in armament,” Wahhab said. “The Druze only need the weapons, training and organization,” he added, calling for creating an operations room in Swaida, and underlining the readiness to send fighters from Lebanon. A longtime supporter of Syria's government, Wahhab said Druze should belong to the “axis of resistance” to protect themselves. “You have men amongst you. Head for the arms. Only arms can protect you, and not silly words and statements,” he said. “You have carried swords to defend yourselves for hundreds of years, now I ask you to carry rifles.”
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri offered his condolences to the victims of Wednesday’s killings in a phone call with Druze spiritual leader in Lebanon Naim Hassan. Hassan, who thanked Berri for his message, underlined the importance of avoiding violence, according to a statement by his media office.

Israel’s Druze dilemma: To arm imperiled Syrian Druze community or open door to a flood of refugees
DEBKAfile Special Report June 11, 2015
Israel has a unique, historic commitment to its Druze citizens and so the dangers besetting more than half a million of their Syrian brethren on Jabal Druze, 88 km from its border, and 38 km from Jordan, confronts the Netanyahu government with a grave dilemma. Israeli Druze leaders are pressing the government to provide Jabal Druze towns and villages with weapons for their defense against the enemies closing in on them: The Syrian-Hizballah army; the Syrian opposition coalition including the Nusra Front – now in control of large parts of southern Syria; and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - ISIS, which has sent a small force up to the eastern approaches to the mountain.
At a reception for the visiting Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey Wednesday, June 10, President Reuven Rivlin said: What is going on just now is intimidation and threat to the very existence of half a million Druze on the Druze Mount, which is very close to the Israeli border.”
Officials in the Pentagon denied that this issue had come up in Gen. Dempsey’s talks during his farewell visit to Israel this week, although Syria had been discussed. One official remarked: “It’s the Druze who are asking everyone to arm them. The Druze in Israel have been raising it with Israel with the US, with Jordan – everyone.”
debkafile’s military sources note that this dilemma is the hardest Israel has faced since the Syrian conflict began more than four years ago. Sending arms to the Syrian Druze would mean abandoning the consistent policy of abstaining from direct involvement in that war. It would moreover entail setting up new machinery for establishing, training and arming a Druze army of 20,000 to 30,000 fighting men.
But by withholding support, Israel would make itself responsible for whatever befalls the beleaguered Syrian Druze community, including possibly mass executions by Islamic extremists for their unique faith.
Also taken into account is the proposal Tehran, Damascus and Hizballah put before the Druzes this week: to build them an army and provide it with weapons, against a pledge never to raise arms against Syrian President Bashar Assad or his troops.
No other strings were tied to the offer. The Druze army would not be given any tasks other than to defend Jabal Druze and its hundreds of small towns and villages.
Druze acceptance of Tehran’s proposition would have the effect of strengthening Iran’s hold on Damascus and weakening the Syrian opposition forces fighting in the south, with no guarantees about where this equation would end up in terms of new threats to Israeli security.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and IDF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gady Eisenkott, are being intensely lobbied by the leaders of Israel’s Druze community, some of them high-ranking officers in IDF and Border Police units, to come to the aid of their distressed Syrian brethren. They hold up their valuable contribution to the Jewish state’s national security as deserving of Israel’s reciprocation to step up when their community is in peril.
No one is saying this, but the awareness is there that the many Druzes serving in Israeli combat units may decide to simply cross the Golan border and take up arms in defense of Jabal Druze. The Syria community’s plight is complicated by the sharp internal division among its leaders: One group urges taking up the Iranian offer; a second would rather join forces with the Syrian rebels; and a third, wants to stick to their long-held neutrality in the Syrian arena. The Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, once accepted as such by the entire community, urges Jabal Druze inhabitants to throw in their lot with the rebel groups fighting to topple Assad. Some Druze sources claim that Israel has promised admission to any fleeing Druze reaching the Golan border fence, an assurance also offered by Jordan. This is not confirmed by any official in either government. However, it is hard to see how Israel can bar its border if thousands of Druze refugees were to stand at the fence and demand shelter - any more than Jordan could. This may still happen - even if Jerusalem and Amman were to decide to supply the Syrian Druzes with weapons.

Al-Qaida Syria Affiliate Kills 20 Druze
Agence France Presse/Naharnet/May 11/15/At least 20 members of Syria’s Druze minority have been killed in an unprecedented shoot-out with Al-Qaida affiliate Al-Nusra Front in northwestern Syria, a monitor said on Thursday.The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the deaths came Wednesday in the village of Qalb Lawzah in Idlib province, most of which is now controlled by an alliance including Al-Nusra. Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman said villagers had protested after a Tunisian Al-Nusra leader “tried to seize a house belonging to a Druze resident of Qalb Lawzah, claiming he was loyal to the regime.” “Relatives of the owner of the house protested and tried to stop him, then there was an altercation and shooting,” he added. “The Tunisian leader brought his men and accused the Druze residents of the village of blasphemy and opened fire on them killing at least 20 people, among them elderly people and at least one child.” Abdel Rahman said some of the villagers had weapons and returned fire, killing three members of Al-Nusra. The Druze deaths were reported by Syria’s official SANA news agency, which accused Al-Nusra and allied Islamist rebel group Ahrar al-Sham of an “appalling massacre committed against the people of Qalb Lawzah that claimed the lives of at least 30 people.” Quoting local sources, SANA said the dead included five members of a single family, three clerics and two women.
The agency also said the “terrorists… looted and burned dozens of homes.”The Druze, followers of a secretive offshoot of Shiite Islam, made up around three percent of Syria’s pre-war population of 23 million people. They are concentrated mostly in the southern province of Sweida, the only Druze-majority region of Syria, but there are several Druze villages through other parts of the country, including in Idlib. The community has been somewhat divided during the country’s uprising, with portions fighting alongside the government, but some parts expressing sympathy for the opposition. Mostly, the Druze have taken up arms only in defense of their areas, and have kept out of the fighting more broadly. The head of the Druze community in neighboring Lebanon, MP Walid Jumblat, is however a vocal opponent of President Bashar Assad’s regime. Writing on his official Twitter account on Thursday, he said contacts were underway to “calm the situation” after the deaths in Qalb Lawzah, without specifying further..

Killing 10,000 ISIS fighters does not mean victory
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya
Thursday, 11 June 2015
Controversy has heated up in Washington over the policy of confronting the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Hearings were held last week, with most military and political affairs experts criticizing U.S. President Barack Obama’s strategy as unsuccessful and unclear.
All we know about the strategy is that it is a commitment to fight ISIS via a military alliance that mostly launches airstrikes against the organization’s posts in Syria and Iraq, and supports Baghdad on the ground. U.S. officials say they have inflicted many losses on ISIS, but this does not mean it has lost. More than 10,000 ISIS fighters are estimated to have been killed, and the organization has been pushed back in some areas. However, it is still making gains The hearing of the U.S. House Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa said ISIS’s battlefield losses do not indicate its defeat, as the latter is growing and strengthening its positions on the ground. U.S.-led bombings have been ongoing for months, with more than 4,000 airstrikes launched. More than 10,000 ISIS fighters are estimated to have been killed, and the organization has been pushed back in some areas. However, it is still making gains.
An incomplete picture
These numbers do not draw a complete picture of the reality on the ground in Iraq and Syria. In the past few months, ISIS’s performance has developed in terms of managing the areas it occupies and dealing with local powers. It has also become more capable of getting local resources to fund its needs and propaganda. Most importantly, it has succeeded in recruiting more fighters, especially from among Sunni Iraqi youths, particularly due to the government’s failure to deter terrorist Shiite militias that brag of burning and killing men just because they are Sunni. Washington’s mistake lies in adopting a mysterious policy. It is supposed to clearly declare its support for everyone fighting ISIS, but Baghdad is using the excuse of sovereignty to prevent the Americans from supporting Anbar tribes, at a time when the Iraqi government does not have any sovereignty on the ground. The U.S. ambassador was embarrassed after promising Sunni tribes to support them with arms if they cooperate with the American-led alliance against ISIS. When they did so, the ambassador retreated after Shiite parties and the Iraqi prime minister objected. In the backseat. Washington is sitting in the backseat behind Baghdad, which is losing control and under domestic and Iranian pressures. Everyone expects the United States to lead, not to be led. What was said during the hearing is worth listening to, as national security analyst Anthony Cordesman criticized Washington for cooperating with Iran in Iraq to fight ISIS when Tehran is an opponent that cannot be trusted. When it comes to Iraq, Iran is not concerned about the spread of ISIS in Sunni areas, because its aim is to tighten its grip on Shiite areas. Therefore, Iran sees ISIS as its ally, or at least not an enemy. What further complicates the war in Iraq is the region’s preoccupation with several other conflicts. Countries cannot fight on all fronts, and some do not want to aid governments with which they are at odds, despite terrorist groups being a mutual threat.

Swiss, Austrian prosecutors conduct 'spy virus' probe over Iran talks
Deputy FM Hotovely says reports linking Israel to spyware are 'baseless'; 'What is much more important is that we prevent a bad agreement where at the end of the day we find ourselves with a Iranian nuclear umbrella,' she says.
Ynetnews/News Agencies
Latest Update: 06.11.15/Israel News
Swiss prosecutors said on Thursday that they opened an espionage investigation in May amid suspicions that Swiss hotels hosting talks on Iran's nuclear program have been targeted in a cyber-spying campaign. A state official in Vienna said Austria was also investigating the suspicions.Kaspersky, a cybersecurity firm, said this week it uncovered the campaign and that the malware was so sophisticated it must have been created by a government. "The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Counterterrorism is aware of the information and is reviewing it," an interior ministry spokesman in Vienna said. He declined to give more details about which locations were under review. The talks have been held in Vienna, Geneva, Lausanne, Montreux and Munich. Andre Marty, a spokesman for Swiss federal prosecutors, said that Switzerland's investigation is directed against persons unknown and was opened following a report from the Swiss intelligence agency. He said in an emailed response that a search took place in Geneva on May 12 during which unspecified information technology material was seized. "You know that there are enemies of these talks and they will do whatever they can, so it's not a surprise to us," Reza Najafi, Iran's ambassador to the UN nuclear agency, told reporters in Vienna.
"We continue to take precautionary measures not to let any details of the discussion go to the public," he added on the sidelines of an International Atomic Energy Agency board meeting. "I should say we have been successful in that regard... Of course there are some cases, which are just incidents."Earlier on Thursday, Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely dismissed as baseless reports Israel may have had a connection to the "spy virus."Both Kaspersky and US security company Symantec said the virus shared some programming with previously discovered espionage software called Duqu, which security experts believe to have been developed by Israelis. Israeli government officials had declined to comment, but on Thursday Tzipi Hotovely denied Israel was involved. "The international reports of Israeli involvement in the matter are baseless," she told Army Radio. "What is much more important is that we prevent a bad agreement where at the end of the day we find ourselves with a Iranian nuclear umbrella," she said. Israel has denounced the diplomatic opening to Iran, saying it doubts any agreement arising from the talks will sufficiently restrain the atomic program of its arch-enemy. The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability from its enrichment of uranium. Iran says it is seeking nuclear energy for electricity and medical isotopes.
**AFP, AP and Reuters contributed to this report.

UN report suggests Iran's satellite tech advancing ballistic missile program
By JPOST.COM STAFF/06/11/2015
The launch of a space satellite by Iran's military may indicate the Islamic Republic's possession of ballistic missile technology, a United Nations panels of experts claimed. According to Fox News, the panel, which on June 1 issued its findings on the February 15 launch, claimed that while Tehran official's “have not been reporting any new ballistic missile developments” or “unveiling or testing of new types of ballistic missiles,” the Islamic Republic intends to deploy three more satellites by March 16 which it hopes to propel “from more powerful launchers and on the back of bigger carriers.”The technology platform used for these experiments is based on a variant of the Shahab-3 ballistic missile, which has a range of 1,000 miles and is considered one of two Iranian missiles that may potentially be able to deliver a nuclear payload. Despite the findings of the panel, the issue of ballistic missile technology has been absent from the tenuous multilateral talks between Iran and the P5+1 nations. The Obama administration did not include any stipulations regarding the powerful delivery system in last November's interim deal and since then has unfrozen billions of dollars of Iranian assets. While the most recent experiment was only a partial success outwardly, its gains may suggest the possibility of a functional ballistic system. The satellite, bearing 110 lbs. [49 kg] freight meant for "image collecting" was meant to remain in orbit for 18 months, but plummeted after only 23 days.Despite their apparent aerospace purpose, these experiments are in contradiction to United Nations sanctions resolutions.
As part of its sanctions regime pertaining to Iran, the UN forbids Iran from any activities “related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology.” In comments from 2014, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, denounced any such expectations, calling them “stupid and idiotic," while urging his country to invest more in its missile development program.

Report: CIA head was in Israel to argue for closure of IAEA nuclear probe of Iran
By YAAKOV LAPPIN/06/11/2015
CIA Director John Brennan likely came to Israel last week to tell Israeli officials that a final nuclear deal with Iran does not have to include a commitment by Tehran to provide access to military bases, or Iranian consent to interview its scientists, a new report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) said. According to the report, written by Ayelet Savyon, director of MEMRI's Iranian project, and Col. (res.) Yigal Carmon, President of MEMRI, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei seems to have torpedoed an arrangement under which IAEA inspectors would be allowed symbolic supervision at Iranian military sites where suspected work has been carried out on military dimensions of the nuclear program. Khamenei reportedly also rejected proposals that would have enabled Iranian scientists to be questioned by the IAEA. Khamenei's rejection has led to an impasse in negotiations between the P5+1 countries, according to the report, with European Union states refusing to conclude a deal in the absence of an arrangement that would satisfy the IAEA's investigation into Possible Military Dimensions (PMD) of Iran's nuclear program. "The Iranian retreat from its agreement to allow a symbolic visit in military sites and the questioning of scientists and military personnel, in exchange for closing the Possible Military Dimensions case [in the IAEA] places President Obama in a problematic situation, and the talks at an impasse, since alongside the Iranian rejection, the EU and the IAEA Director-General [Yukiya Amano] refuse to shut the PMD case," the report said.
"Under these circumstances, it seems the head of the CIA, John Brennan, was sent to Israel to convince it - and through it, the European Union - that intelligence monitoring of every suspected instance of a military dimension in the Iranian nuclear program is a sufficient solution, and that the [IAEA's] PMD investigation can be left aside," Carmon and Savyon wrote. According to a Haaretz report, Brennan visited Israel last week and met with senior security officials, including Mossad head Tamir Pardo, the head of Military Intelligence, Maj.-Gen. Herzl Halevi, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and National Security Adviser Yossi Cohen. Israeli officials refused to comment on the report. MEMRI cited Iranian media reports that described how Khameni apparently shot down an agreement reached between his own Iranian negotiators and the P5+1 on ways to resolve the IAEA's investigation, which remains open due to a lack of Iranian cooperation. According to one Iranian report, in order to reach a final agreement by the June 30 deadline, the US has shown willingness to give up on inspections at Iranian military bases and make due only with inspections at declared nuclear sites, while intelligence agencies would handle ongoing monitoring of the Iranian nuclear program. But that proposal has not satisfied the EU or the IAEA. Iran's refusal to answer the IAEA's questions, and its ongoing denial of access to inspectors at sites like the Parchin military complex, has left talks at a dead end, the report said.

Erdogan lost because he tested Turkish democracy
David Ignatius| The Daily Star/June 11, 2015
The march of authoritarianism around the world has had different names over the past decade: “Neo-Ottomanism,” “Putinism,” “the Beijing Consensus.” The shared premise has been that fragile democratic systems were no match for strong rulers who can impose top-down solutions. This idea of the efficient despot got a sharp rebuff Sunday in Turkey’s parliamentary elections. In a turnout of over 86 percent, voters denied President Recep Tayyip Erdogan the majority he needed to rewrite the constitution and give himself more executive authority. The result affirmed the stabilizing power of democracy and the wisdom of an informed electorate. Turkish commentators were jubilant. “Pax Erdogan is over,” Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, the German Marshall Fund’s representative in Ankara, told The New York Times, adding, “Turkey has proved to be a self-correcting democracy.” Bulent Aliriza of the Center for Strategic and International Studies likened the election to “a nuclear explosion in Turkish politics.”
Why did Turkish voters reject authoritarianism at a time when its appeal still seems strong in other places? The answer surely begins with the relative strength of political institutions in Turkey. Secular democracy is nearly a century-old there: It has survived hot wars, cold wars, military coups and religious extremists. Turks know they have something to lose if their system is hijacked.
Turkey also has a civic culture that can support democratic institutions. It has a vibrant free-market economy, a free press, a strong military and an independent legal system. These were the very parts of Turkish society that Erdogan was seen as trying to intimidate or repress in his bid for greater power. Journalists, generals and judges couldn’t fight back effectively on their own; but voters together could do so. Erdogan himself, ironically, helped encourage the Kurdish activism that was a potent factor in Sunday’s elections. As leader of the Justice and Development Party, or AK Party, he has courted Kurdish votes by offering greater rights – and even by making peace, for a time, with the extremist group known as the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.
But Sunday, the vehicle for Kurdish self-expression turned out to be the liberal People’s Democratic Party, or HDP, headed by the charismatic Selahattin Demirtas. It won more than 13 percent to become the first explicitly Kurdish-oriented parliamentary party in Turkey’s history. This embrace of pluralism in Turkish life may be as important as the rejection of Erdogan’s executive-power grab.
The Turkish election has global importance because it challenges what had seemed, until recently, the inexorable rise of nationalist strongmen and authoritarian parties. Proponents of the so-called Beijing Consensus argued that the great advantage of the Chinese model was that it worked; centralized state power could achieve results that were impossible in more chaotic, bottom-up democracies. These anti-democrats were buoyed (and critics were deflated) by the success of China’s President Xi Jinping, who styles himself these days as “Xi Dada,” or “Big Daddy Xi.”Russian’s Vladimir Putin is another avatar of modern authoritarianism. What’s disturbing about Putin is that his corrupt, belligerent regime is extremely popular with the Russian people. A Russian polling firm called the Levada Center reported recently that his popularity stands at 86 percent, despite sanctions, a declining economy and suppression of dissent. President Barack Obama’s approval rating, by contrast, currently stands at about 45 percent. The qualities of reason and restraint that arguably help define Obama as a democratic leader are taken, in his case, as signs of weakness.
Putin seems to answer a popular Russian yearning for greatness and empire. But similar words were used just a few months ago to describe Erdogan’s appeal as a “neo-Ottoman,” a Turkish leader with the power (and palaces) of a sultan. Even as popular resistance began to surface in the Gezi Park protests in 2013, Erdogan pressed ahead. It wasn’t obvious that he had overreached until Sunday.Fareed Zakaria has written over the past decade about the rise of what he calls “illiberal democracy” – the growing power of leaders such as Erdogan, Xi and Putin who govern with a veneer of popular legitimacy but a core of state control. You could add Egypt’s popularly elected strongman, President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi, to that list.
Americans are too quick to define democracy in terms of elections. What produced Sunday’s genuinely democratic outcome in Turkey was something deeper than the fact that large numbers of people went to the polls. Erdogan failed to get his mandate because he challenged a culture of checks and balances, and the institutions that give Turkish democracy its resilience.
**David Ignatius is published twice weekly by THE DAILY STAR.

Death by Lashing: Saudi Arabia/Raif Badawi and the Travesty of Justice in Saudi Arabia
Salim Mansur/Gatestone Institute
June 11, 2015
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5949/badawi-lashing-saudi-arabia
Nothing could uplift the universal image of Saudi Arabia and King Salman more than if today he issued a pardon. World leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, who has so far been silent on the issue, should immediately speak out — as should the media and human rights groups.
There was no insult of Islam, of the prophet, or of the Quran, in what Badawi wrote; and, truth be told, God, Islam and the prophet are all beyond insults, and beyond the reach of profanity that occasionally spills forth from the bigoted or tortured minds of individuals.
The treatment of Raif Badawi stands out, not merely for its cruelty, but how it has come to symbolize the grotesquely repulsive nature of the Saudi kingdom and what it represents behind the mask of religious austerity.
Tomorrow, Friday, the virtual death sentence by 1000 lashes, delivered “very harshly” according to the flogging order, fifty at a time, might continue for Raif Badawi, a 31-year-old Saudi blogger and father of three, for allegedly “insulting Islam.”
The flogging sentence, plus ten years in prison, was upheld last week by Saudi Arabia’s supreme court, and can now only be overturned by a pardon from King Salman.
Although Badawi, who is ill and frail, would most certainly perish, in Saudi justice there is little concern for sentences to be proportionate to the crimes for which the accused are found guilty, or for adequate legal representation. Badawi’s lawyer, Walid Abu al-Khair, was also jailed, effectively for the crime of representing him.
Badawi was accused of insulting Islam in his blog posts. In a country where thinking is forbidden, Badawi had expressed forbidden thoughts by questioning the nature of his society and going public with them.
Badawi, for instance, had written, “Muslims in Saudi Arabia not only disrespect the beliefs of others, but also charge them with infidelity — to the extent that they consider anyone who is not Muslim an infidel. They also, within their own narrow definitions, consider non-Hanbali [the Saudi school of Islam] Muslims as apostates. How can we be such people and build… normal relations with six billion humans, four and a half billion of whom do not believe in Islam?”
There was naivety in putting such thoughts in writing, as Badawi did, and drawing the attention of Saudi thought police. In another post, Badawi suggested, “Secularism respects everyone and does not offend anyone… Secularism is the practical solution to lift countries (including ours) out of the third world and into the first world.”
It appears Badawi wrote in the first blush of what seemed to have been a breath of fresh air, characterized as the “Arab Spring,” that wafted across the politically bleak landscape of the Arab world in early 2011. There had come news of a Tunisian vendor who had put lit himself on fire protesting police brutality, and had died as a result; his death sparked a movement against Arab despots.
The anguish of the Tunisian vendor, Mohammed Bouazizi, was genuine. His tragic death brought people into the streets, and the Tunisian strongman, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, eventually fled into exile in January 2011. The Tunisian protest stirred Egyptians to rise against their strongman, President Hosni Mubarak, and succeed in toppling him in February 2011.
The “Arab Spring,” for those brief few weeks in early 2011, held forth the promise of change for better across the Arab world. And young men like Raif Badawi could be forgiven for imagining that they, too, in Saudi Arabia, could no longer be denied freedom, democracy, and secularism — the accepted norms in the West.
But the hard realities of the Arab world turned the promise of the “Arab Spring” into the nightmare of religious terror and counter-terror. Saudi Arabia is the incubator and citadel of Islamic fascism, otherwise known as Wahhabism. And here in the land of the two holy cities of Islam — Mecca and Medina — religion and politics are inseparable, and anyone who trespasses either does so at the risk of losing his head — literally — in the public beheadings that are the hallmark of the Saudi kingdom.
Raif Badawi was arrested, and has been held in prison in Jeddah since June 2012. The arrest of Badawi and Souad al-Shammari came after they together set up the web site called Saudi Liberal Network. It was promptly closed by the authorities when Badawi posted criticism of the Saudi religious police.
The initial sentence for Badawi by the Criminal Court in Jeddah for mischief and subverting public order was for 600 lashes and seven years in prison. He appealed, and the court returned the verdict by raising the sentence to 1000 lashes and 10 years in prison. The Saudi supreme court has upheld this sentence.
In the interim Badawi was given 50 lashes in a Jeddah public square in January of this year, while further lashings were suspended on medical grounds. Badawi’s wife, Ensaf Haidar, fears the lashings will resume — according to court order the 1000 lashes are to be completed in 20 sessions in front of a mosque — and could be fatal for her husband.
* * *
There is very little the outside world can do to change the nature of the Saudi regime, or for that matter the regime in Iran, which is indistinguishable from the Saudi regime in terms of tyranny and the cruelty to which, in both countries, dissidents are subjected.
After Raif Badawi was arrested, Ensaf Haidar and her children found refuge in Quebec, Canada. Across Quebec there has been heartfelt popular support expressed for Raif Badawi, and condemnation of his punishment. Quebec has officially protested Badawi’s sentence, while demanding his release from Saudi Arabia so that he might join his family where they have settled.
In response to a Quebec National Assembly resolution, passed unanimously in February, condemning Badawi’s lashings in Jeddah in January 2015, the Saudi ambassador to Canada wrote a letter to the Quebec politicians. The same letter was also sent to the Canadian government in Ottawa.
The letter, signed by the Saudi ambassador, Naif Bin Bandir Alsudairy, was obtained by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). It states, “The Kingdom does not accept at all any attack on it in the name of human rights especially when its constitution is based on Islamic law, which guarantees the rights of humans and preserves his blood, money, honour and dignity.”
The stand taken by the Quebec government apparently rattled the Saudi kingdom sufficiently to have its ambassador write a letter addressed to members of a provincial legislature.
* * *
It is one of the anomalies of our age that when, by a fluke of nature, large deposits of fossil fuels are discovered in a country, as in Saudi Arabia, it is accorded attention and respect by other countries in excess of anything it has done, or achieved, or by the record of its conduct in human affairs.
Apart from the oil reserves of the kingdom, the House of Saud is indistinguishable from the House of Kim ruling North Korea, and it is as deserving of the same contempt.
Oil has not only made the difference for Saudi Arabia, it has also made the West complicit in the evil that Saudi Arabia does at home and perpetrates abroad: spreading its pre-modern and perverted culture as Islam or, more appropriately, Wahhabism; and funding terror as jihadism.
The treatment of Raif Badawi stands out, not merely for its cruelty, but how it has come to symbolize the grotesquely repulsive nature of the Saudi kingdom and what it represents behind the mask of religious austerity.
Saudi Arabia is possessed with the opposite of the “Midas touch”: wherever its money buys influence, there, the natural goodness in society is stained and corroded by its touch.
The tragedy surrounding Raif Badawi is both the savage treatment meted out to a young man by the Saudi regime for simply expressing his thoughts, and of how innocence, when it goes against the culture of Saudi intolerance, is mocked, abused, and strangled.
Raif Badawi is also the face of why “official” Islam — the one portrayed by Saudi Arabia and the other OIC member states, and to which the West routinely defers – is so terribly retarded. Freedom of thought is anathema to “official” Islam and its defenders, as it once was in the former Soviet Union; it is the defining characteristic of a closed, totalitarian society.
Raif Badawi is a young man, and the thoughts he expressed were the unsullied thoughts of the young that are at once universal in expectations and desires, as they are innocent and unburdened by the hardness of life’s experiences.
There was no insult of Islam, of the prophet, or of the Quran, in what Badawi wrote; and truth be told, God, Islam, and the prophet are all beyond insults, and beyond the reach of profanity that occasionally spills forth from the bigoted or tortured minds of individuals.
“Official” Islam is an insult to Muslims and non-Muslims alike — for “official” Islam is politics devoid of any redeeming quality found in faith, which nourishes the spiritual yearning of people and uplifts them in a broken world. Through betrayal and hypocrisy, “official” Islam insults God, Islam, and the prophet, every minute of each day, and has become a torment to Muslims.
It is “official” Islam, and Wahhabism in its most perverted expression among Sunni Muslims, that has turned God — Allah in Arabic — repeatedly invoked in the Quran as the “Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful,” into a vengeful and capricious deity.
The Quran states that on the Day of Reckoning the prophet will speak forth, “O my Lord! Lo! mine own folk make this Qur’an of no account” (25:30). In another verse, the Quran instructs the prophet to tell the wandering Arabs of the desert that they have merely submitted, but they have no belief “for the faith hath not yet entered into your hearts” (49:14). And then there is the verse stating categorically, “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256).[1]
When religion is reduced to politics then it is the logic of politics, hence power and coercion, that takes precedence. In Albert Camus’s striking formulation, “Politics is not religion, or if it is, then it is nothing but the Inquisition.”[2] In Saudi Arabia, religion is a daily dose of inquisition, and the executioner with his sword is both the reality and the symbol of the vengeful deity that bears little resemblance to the merciful and compassionate God of the Quran.
Raif Badawi’s innocence betrayed him. Age and experience would have taught him the hard reality of his culture, veiled by the mask of “official” Islam. This hard reality of Arab culture has been best understood by Arab poets through the years of Arab and Muslim history. Here is one example of a poet’s disgust with the hard reality of his country’s culture and politics. These are lines from a poem of Nizar Qabbani (1923-98), a much-loved Syrian-Arab poet:
When a helmet becomes God in heaven
and can do what it wishes
with a citizen – crush, mash
kill and resurrect
whatever it wills,
then the state is a whorehouse,
history is a rag,
and thought is lower than boots.
When a breath of air
comes by decree
of the sultan,
when every grain of wheat we eat,
every drop of water we drink
comes only by decree
of the sultan,
when an entire nation turns into
a herd of cattle fed in the sultan’s
shed, embryos will suffocate
in the womb, women will miscarry
and the sun will drop
a black noose over our square.[3]
The Sultan’s power is vainglorious, whimsical, easily insulted, and secured by perpetrating fear, and the realm he rules by decree is by necessity a slaughterhouse.
If Raif Badawi survives the thousand lashes in the slaughterhouse that is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, it will be a testimony of how an individual’s courage, born of innocence, might well defy the Sultan’s decree.
Nothing could uplift the universal image of Saudi Arabia or King Salman more than if today he issued a pardon.
World leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, who has so far been silent on the issue, should immediately speak out — as should the media and human rights groups.
[1] Verses quoted from the Quran are from The Meaning of the Glorious Koran, translated by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall (New York: Alfred A. Knopf and Everyman’s Library, 1930, 1992).
[2] A. Camus, The Rebel (New York: Vintage Books, Random House, 1956), p. 302.
[3] Nizar Qabbani, “From The Actors” in Salma Khadra Jayyusi (editor), Modern Arabic Poetry: An Anthology (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), pp. 378-379.

Nuclear Negotiations At An Impasse:
Leader Khamenei Rejects Agreement Reached On Token Inspection Of Military Sites And Questioning Of Scientists; U
.S. Willing To Close IAEA Dossier On Iranian PMD, To Settle For Inspecting Declared Nuclear Sites Only, And To Rely On Intelligence; EU Objects
By: A. Savyon and Y. Carmon*
Introduction
This past week, members of Iran's nuclear negotiating team revealed details about the Iran-U.S. nuclear negotiations. The negotiations were dealt a blow when Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei rejected an agreement reached by the two sides concerning a token inspection of military facilities and questioning of several nuclear scientists and "military personnel"; these were to be the response to the IAEA's open dossier on possible military dimensions (PMD) of Iran's nuclear program to which Iran has so far refused to respond.
Iranian reports on these developments show that in order to arrive at a comprehensive agreement, the U.S. is willing to forgo actual inspection of Iranian military facilities and to settle for inspection of declared nuclear facilities only, as set forth under the Additional Protocol, while the ongoing monitoring of Iran's nuclear program will be left to intelligence elements.[1]
Thus, at this stage, there is a deadlock: Iran is refusing both to respond to the IAEA dossier on its PMD, and to allow actual inspection of facilities that are not declared nuclear facilities.
Furthermore, the EU has announced its objections to a comprehensive agreement with Iran in the absence of satisfactory answers from it regarding the IAEA dossier on its PMD. It said that the IAEA investigation of the PMD "will be essential" to a nuclear deal.[2] IAEA Director-General Yukio Amano has also linked the investigation of Iranian PMD to the attainment of such an agreement.
The Issue: Inspection Of Iranian Military Sites, Questioning Of Iranian Scientists
On May 25, 2015, in an Iranian television interview, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister and head negotiator Abbas Araghchi disclosed that this issue had been agreed upon, but that when the Iranian team returned to Tehran for Khamenei's approval, Khamenei had rejected this agreed solution out of hand (see MEMRI TV Clip No. 4928, Top Iranian Nuclear Negotiator Abbas Aragchi: We Reached Solution with P5+1 on Site Inspection, But Khamenei Rejected It, May 25, 2015 and Appendix I).[3]
It was evident also from Aragchi's statements that after Khamenei rejected the agreed solution, Iran even reneged from what had been agreed as part of the Additional Protocol, and is now insisting that limitations and restrictions that are part of the Protocol be implemented in a way that will make future inspections difficult. As part of Iran's backpedaling, Araghchi repeatedly emphasized that "so far, nothing has been concluded" regarding the issue of the inspections.[4]
U.S. Willingness To Disregard IAEA PMD Dossier
Statements by negotiating team member Hamid Baidinejad show that in return for willingness on Iran's part to sign a comprehensive agreement, the U.S. was willing to forgo actual investigation of the IAEA's open PMD dossier on Iran and instead to conduct a token inspection of military sites and questioning of Iranian nuclear scientists and military personnel. The U.S. asked Iran to carry out a number of specific steps, thereby paving the way to a comprehensive solution for this issue. These steps included inspections at several points in Iran, including two military facilities, and questioning several senior military officials and scientists (see Appendix II).
Iranian Negotiators' Two Versions Of Events
An analysis of these statements by the Iranian negotiators shows that there are two different versions of what took place in the negotiations. According to Araghchi, the Iranian team agreed to the U.S.'s demand for a token inspection, but when the team returned to Tehran, Khamenei completely rejected this token inspection. Aragchi's disclosure that the Iranian negotiators had arrived at an agreement with the Americans that was subsequently rejected by Khamenei caused an uproar in the Iranian political system, triggering harsh criticism against both the negotiators and the leaders of the pragmatic camp, and even leading to a public confrontation between Khamenei and pragmatic camp leader Hashemi Rafsanjani.[5]
The second version of events emerged after the uproar sparked by Aragchi's revelations. Another negotiator, Baidinejad, in an attempt to correct Araghchi's claim, stated that the Iranian negotiators had rejected the U.S. demands, even the demand for token inspection, but that the Americans had pressed them to present the demand to Khamenei anyway; when they did so, at the Americans' urging, Khamenei rejected it outright.
Conclusion
Iran's reneging on its consent to the U.S. demand for token inspections of its military facilities and questioning of some of its scientists and military personnel in exchange for the closing of the IAEA's PMD dossier on it places President Obama in a difficult situation, and brings the negotiations to an impasse. This is because along with Khamenei's rejection, the EU and the IAEA director-general both oppose closing Iran's dossier in order to arrive at a comprehensive agreement.
It was apparently under these circumstances that CIA director John Brennan was secretly dispatched in early June to Israel, in order to persuade Israel, and, via Israel, the EU, that intelligence monitoring of any Iranian PMD was a satisfactory solution and that actual investigation of the PMD, which Khamenei rejected, could be waived. To this end, Brennan also underlined, on May 31, 2015 on CBS's Face the Nation, the close U.S.-Israel security cooperation.[6]
In light of this situation, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said on May 31, 2015 that with regard to inspection, "other solutions must be discussed."[7]
Appendix I: Aragchi's Version Of Events
In an interview that aired May 25, 2015 on Iran's Channel 2 TV,Araqchi said [8]: "[Our] red lines may change under certain circumstances. This is another issue. We may change some of our red lines for a certain period of time. This is not a problem. The [leader] will give us new instructions, and the team will act accordingly. We have acted within this framework, and we will do so in the future. We will not let ourselves go beyond this framework...
"The Additional Protocol, which is the internationally accepted [control] regime, was not a red line for us. As I said before, our [negotiating] team does not determine those red lines. From the very beginning - and given that the Additional Protocol is [internationally] accepted – we were given permission to accept it during the negotiations. So far, it has not been accepted – we do not have an agreement yet - but it is one of the issues that the negotiating team has been given instructions to accept. As I said, the red lines may or may not be changed in due course, and the Additional Protocol may or may not be accepted at some point, but so far, this has not happened, and our instructions have not changed...
"If the military officials, the relevant officials, the Iranian parliament or the council appointed by Khamenei reach the conclusion that the access provided for in the Additional Protocol comes under the same category as the inspections that Khamenei banned, we will obey and will categorically not allow 'managed access...'
"The 'Possible Military Dimension' [PMD] has always been a strong pretext for the [West]. We have to take this pretext away from them. We have created conditions that will enable us, within the framework of reaching the final nuclear agreement, to resolve the issue of PMD. This is possible now. In the negotiations, we discussed and reached several possible solutions, but these were not accepted in Tehran. These include [allowing the IAEA] to interview several [nuclear scientists], and allowing access to several facilities. They gave us a list and said: 'If you let us have access to these people and these facilities, we will end the issue of PMD.' This, however, was not accepted by Tehran, and Khamenei decisively and courageously rejected it.."
Appendix II: Baidinejad's Version Of Events
In June 1, 2015 statements on his Instagram account that were quoted by the Iranian news agency Fars, negotiating team member Hamid Baidinejad said:[9] "One of the first principles agreed upon, already at the start of the Iran-P5+1 negotiations, was that in a future nuclear agreement, Iran would implement the Additional Protocol on a temporary and voluntary basis until the Majlis decides whether to ratify it and takes into account the other side's implementation of its obligations…
"It is natural that after a comprehensive nuclear agreement is signed, Iran would be expected to revert to its previous decision – that is, temporarily and voluntarily implementing the Additional Protocol... Without the implementation of the Additional Protocol, even if it is on a temporary basis, the IAEA will not be able to confirm that Iran's nuclear program is civilian, and that would mean that the process for resolving the nuclear issue will have failed...
"In no way does the Additional Protocol include a clause regarding an obligation on the part of the member states to agree to inspection of their military facilities or investigation of their nuclear scientists. The only thing that the Additional Protocol does make possible is controlled access to non-nuclear facilities, for taking [soil] samples for proving that there is no nuclear activity at facilities that are not declared [to be nuclear sites]...
"Should there be evidence of nuclear material at undeclared sites, whether they are military or civilian, the IAEA will be able to demand controlled access to them [but] only by means of a specific procedure already set out, so that an [Additional Protocol] member state will agree to the sampling in order to prove that it is not conducting nuclear activity in undeclared facilities...
"The Additional Protocol is not a special agreement between the international community and Iran; it is an important international document. Over 120 states are currently members of this protocol, and some have signed it and implemented it temporarily. Therefore, the attempt to interpret it in a way that will include an obligation on the part of [member]states to undergo inspection at [their] military facilities or to allow investigation of [their] nuclear scientists is completely mistaken...
"The discussion on the issue of [Iran's] PMD, [that is,] Western countries' claim that Iran has a military nuclear program for producing nuclear weapons, is historically rooted in the years prior to 2003. In recent years, U.S. and Western intelligence services have said that before 2003, Iran's military wing – commanded by specific commanders in the country – engaged in an extensive clandestine project for producing nuclear weapons. To prove their mistaken claim, [the West] presented intelligence based on their intelligence agencies; however, Iran considers all this intelligence [data] to be faked... There is no doubt that these false accusations against Iran can only be resolved with a political agreement. Discussion of this issue, no matter how lengthy, will not remove these accusations...
"[That is why] the Iranian negotiating team proposed during the talks that Iran and the P5+1 resolve this issue, because they [i.e. the P5+1] would like, along with reaching an agreement, that the issue of the accusations [that Iran] attempted to obtain nuclear weapons will be resolved. They proposed that Iran take several specific steps and thus pave the way to a comprehensive solution to the issue... Iran announced that it considers this dossier faked... But an agreement on it depends on what steps Iran will be asked to take [in order to close the dossier]. They announced that they will discuss the issue on level of the P5+1 [alone] because of its special sensitivity, and will submit their final opinion to Iran at the appropriate time.
"In the round [of talks] that preceded the [April 2015] press release in Lausanne, the P5+1 countries presented Iran with a program that includes inspection at a few points, including two military facilities, and questioning of several senior military officials and nuclear experts whose names were noted in the IAEA reports both directly and indirectly. They claimed that [if they] were allowed access to these sites, and the IAEA was permitted to question these people, that would be the end of the matter of the [PMD] accusations against Iran. As soon as this insulting proposal was raised, Iran rejected it unequivocally... At the same time, the P5+1 asked the Iranian representatives to present the P5+1's opinion to officials in Iran, despite their express opposition, [for the officials' approval].
"Leader [Khamenei's] harsh response rejecting the demand by these countries to inspect military facilities and question nuclear scientists was a completely correct and accurate response. The nuclear negotiations team is proud of having expressed the exact same position [as Khamenei] three months ago, thanks to its complete grasp of the position of the regime and of the leader... Unfortunately, there were some in Iran who were not updated on the details of this issue... and instead of praising the Iranian negotiating team, took the opportunity, while being unaware of the process by which the issue was brought up for discussion – which was reported in full to top regime officials – to launch extremely harsh attacks on the Iranian negotiating team, to plan protests, and to demand a halt to the negotiations...
"These objections and accusations will not last long, but airing these concerns to public opinion can cast doubt on the regime's main institutions. Everyone is expected to understand Iran's critical circumstances, and, in this Year of Empathy Between the Government and the People they must join hands in defending Iran's basic principles and rights and must unite with senior officials in order to efficiently promote the sensitive stage of the nuclear negotiations under the guidance of top senior officials in the regime of the Islamic Republic – and especially by Leader [Khamenei] who is very closely overseeing the negotiations. This way, if an agreement is reached, it will guarantee the preservation of the great Iranian nation's basic principles."
* A. Savyon is Director of the MEMRI Iranian Media Project; Y. Carmon is President and Founder of MEMRI.
Endnotes:
[1] Under the Additional Protocol, the clarification of PMDs at facilities that are not declared nuclear facilities is subject to the consent of the member state under investigation; thus, such sites in fact cannot be inspected.
[2] AP, June 8 2015.
[3] In the interview, Aragchi said that the NPT's Additional Protocol was not a red line for the Iranian team, and that the team had in fact beeninstructed to accept it. He explained that Iran could always harden its position on these issues. See MEMRI TV Clip No. 4928, "Top Iranian Nuclear Negotiator Abbas Araqchi: We Reached Solution with P5+1 on Site Inspection, But Khamenei Rejected It," May 25, 2015. It should be mentioned that under former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, IAEA questioning of Iranian scientists was permitted, and two visits to the Parchin military facility were allowed. The Iranian team's acceptance of this demand by the international community was presumably based on this precedent.
[4] Irib (Iran), June 4, 2014.
[5] Senior figures in Iran's ideological camp hastened to obscure Araghchi's statements, and to correct them. Majlis speaker for national security affairs Alaa Al-Boroujerdi stated that Aragchi's words were untrue, and added: "Aragchi only discussed the major issues, and did not say that Iran had consented to inspection of military facilities... Khamenei announced that we will not allow any talks with Iranian scientists, after he noticed that we were under threat by terrorists. The arrest of several who murdered our nuclear scientists revealed that these [perpetrators] were linked to the Mossad. We have red lines, and we will implement them. ISNA, Iran, May 25, 2015. The Javan daily, which is affiliated with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), also denied Aragchi's statements regarding the red lines: "In a television interview, top Iranian negotiation [Aragchi] referred to a particular point, and this issue should be addressed. He said: '...Perhaps under certain conditions our red lines will change, and the work [of the negotiations] will proceed according to instructions.' This declaration regarding the possibility of changes to the red lines under certain circumstances is mistaken, for several reasons... As is evident from their names, the red lines are borders that define the basic framework of the negotiations, and without them the negotiations will reach undesirable and unexpected results." Javan also warned the Iranian negotiating team about deviating from the red lines: "The Iranian nation supports its negotiating team as long as it operates to realize its rights in the framework of the national interests and preserves national honor. Any withdrawal from this basis, and acceptance of being forced into humiliation by the enemy side, will be met with a popular response from the nation, and will undoubtedly go down in history as a dark and negative point." Javan, Iran, May 26, 2015. A new website affiliated with the extremist ideological camp called on May 26, 2015 on Khamenei to fire Foreign Minister Zarif and his negotiating team for their "American tendencies." Amanpress.ir, May 26, 2015.
[6] Haaretz (Israel), June 9, 2015.
[7] Mehr (Iran), May 31, 2015.
[8] See MEMRI TV Clip No. 4928, Top Iranian Nuclear Negotiator Abbas Aragchi: We Reached Solution with P5+1 on Site Inspection, But Khamenei Rejected It, May 25, 2015.
[9] Fars (Iran), June 1, 2015.