No Regrets
Somehow, this headline doesn't capture Kuntar's thought:
18.7.08
17.7.08
Quntar Investigation
In a slightly more ideal world than this one, should there not be some kind of offical Lebanese investigation into Quntar's deeds? I mean, if he really did kill the girl - might he not do it again? The worrying thing is, that the Lebanese are celebrating what they do not know.
Now Lebanon: Is it really worth it?
NOW Anti-Hezbullah, publishes a link to this as if it were news. This website is becoming more and more an (unfunny) joke.
16.7.08
humiliated
Angry Arab:
Watching the prisoner release in Lebanon, somebody of my generation can only reach this conclusion: Israel has been humiliated in Lebanon in the last 2 decades, and its ability to inflict pain on Lebanon and the Lebanese without restraint or punishment (as it has done in 1950s, 1960s, 1970s) has been deterred. What Israel has said (racistly) about all Arabs (that the only language they understand is the language of force) paradoxically applies to Israel itself. It also brings to mind--to my mind at least--that Yaser `Arafat was one of the worst people to preside over a revolution--any revolution. He so miserably mismanaged the confrontation with Israel, and did not treat Palestinian prisoners in Israel with the respect that they deserve. Muhammad Dahlan is the legitimate "child" of Arafat. And none of the Western coverage is pointing out the cruel and inhumane role of Ehud Barak in 1978: the man who shot Dalal Mughrabi while she was dead. He pulled her by the hair (only after she died as he would not dare do that to an alive Dalal) and mutilated her body before tearing her shirt off. Such are the sexual perversions of the former prime minister of Israel. And as for the details of the deeds of Dalal and her comrades, don't ever believe Israeli accounts of "enemy" operations. The state consistently lies and consistently fabricates. And that saying from the Babylonian Talmud applies to Israel: the punishment of the liar is that he is not believed even when he tells the truth. Just go back to my posts during the Israeli war on Lebanon in 2006: I tried to catalogue the lies and fabrications of Israel during the war. Don't you remember the account of the three dead Iranian soldiers that Israel "found" in South Lebanon? Don't you remember that Israel claimed to be holding "hundreds" of bodies of Hizbullah fighters? (The number now it admits is five). I don't know what happened in 1979, but the family of Samir Quntar also denies the typically fabricated account that is put out by Israeli propaganda (repeated verbatim typically in the U.S. press). Quntar was 16 at the time and his brother Bassam has something to say about his brother in Al-Akhbar today. Israel lied about Munich and about every other confrontation with its Arab enemies, just as Arab governments lie. It is not easy for a state (Israel) that was founded on a racist ideology to accept that Arabs are like other people: that they cherish their dead and their living just like other...people.
Now Lebanon: is it worth it?
Look at this, from Now Lebanon. This summarises the point of the Karam/Kenner project: say anything against Hezbullah. They utterly accept the Israeli idea that the July War, and all the deaths that resulted from it, lie in the hands of Hezbullah. As if, without Hezullah, Israel would leave Lebanon alone. Just look at this crap.
Middle East: Grave mistake to attack Iran, warns Syria
Guardian:
Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, warned yesterday that any attack on Iran's nuclear programme would have grave consequences for the US, Israel and the whole world.
But Assad, Iran's most important Arab ally, also promised to discuss the issue with Tehran, suggesting that Syria, itself shunned by the US, could mediate in a crisis which has escalated, with Iranian and Israeli sabre-rattling in the last fortnight.
"It will cost the US and the planet dear," he told France Inter radio yesterday during his visit to Paris. "Israel will pay directly the price of this war. Iran has said so. The problem is that when one starts such action in the Middle East, one cannot manage ... reactions that can spread out over years or even decades."
Assad attacked the "warmonger's logic" of the Bush administration, but added: "We are going to have discussions with our Iranian friends to get to the heart of the matter. This is the first time that we had been asked to play a role."
Hizbullah’s Ultimate Victory
The Media Line:
The poster on the Lebanese side of the border said it all: Israel sheds tears of sorrow, Lebanon sheds tears of joy.
The pictures from Naqoura were the ones Israelis had been dreading for two years since Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser were seized by Hizbullah – an event that sparked off the summer war in southern Lebanon and northern Israel. Two simple black coffins were presented to the media.
On the Israeli side of the border the families and friends of the two burst into uncontrollable tears on witnessing the pictures relayed from the Hizbullah-controlled Al-Manar TV.
It is not all that Hizbullah controls in Lebanon today. Indeed, the handover of the bodies in exchange for five living Lebanese, including Samir Quntar, the man serving four life sentences for his role in a terror attack in Israel in 1979, is arguably the icing on the cake in two wonderful years for Hizbullah and its pro-Syrian allies.
It is hard to argue that Israel achieved either of its stated aims in the 2006 war – it failed to return Regev and Goldwasser and it did not weaken Hizbullah by pushing it to lines behind the Litani River.
The New Lebanese Equation: The Christians’ Central Role
ICG. Full version in french:
After decades during which they saw their influence consistently decline, Lebanon’s Christians are in a position to once again play a decisive political role. The May 2008 Doha agreement, coming in the wake of Hizbollah’s takeover of West Beirut, provides the Christian community with the opportunity to regain an important place on the political map and to advance demands that have long been ignored. Already, Christians have obtained key positions in the new government, which was formed on 12 July. But the Doha agreement goes well beyond.
The Doha accords have ushered in three significant changes. First, they led to the election as president of Michel Suleiman, the former army commander. As a result, the Christians recovered the institution to which they are constitutionally entitled but whose effective powers had considerably diminished since the crisis began in 2004. The new president is likely to be courted by political actors of all stripes, each seeking to shape decisions he will face at his term’s outset. These include initiation of a dialogue on a national defence strategy (which, ultimately, will have to include the question of Hizbollah’s weapons), preparation of the 2009 parliamentary elections and the definition of new relations between Syria and Lebanon founded on mutual respect for sovereignty.
Secondly, the Doha agreement paves the way for a more Christian-friendly electoral law. Up until now, the electoral map was such that the vast majority of Christian candidates had to enter into alliances with the main Muslim parties. Most Christian politicians, it follows, were elected thanks to Muslim votes. Not any more. Post-Doha, Christian parliamentarians for the most part will be elected in predominantly Christian disticts. That means they will have real leverage and be able to adjudicate between the two principal Muslim poles, the one dominated by the Sunni Future Movement, the other by the Shiite Hizbollah. Because Lebanon’s political system broadly allocates ministerial seats in accordance with various parties’ parliamentary weight, the Christian vote will be decisive in the establishment of a novel balance of power – unless, of course, violence or massive irregularities prevent the holding of elections or undermine their credibility.
Thirdly and lastly, Christians will be in a position to revitalise old demands which the rest of the political class generally has disregarded. President Suleiman mentioned these in his inaugural address and Michel Aoun, the community’s self-proclaimed leader, also made them the focus of his effort to build a large Christian coalition. Among these demands are long overdue and ever deferred administrative reforms (eg, decentralisation), empowering the presidency, ensuring better Christian representation in senior civil service positions, rejecting the naturalisation of Palestinian refugees and facilitating the return of displaced and exiled co-religionists. Never before have these claims – which have long obsessed members of the Christian community – been as central a part of the political debate as they are today. Because powerful Muslim actors will need to ensure the loyalty of Christian politicians, and because such politicians’ leverage thereby will be strengthened, some of these longstanding demands could well be realised in the end.
For Lebanon’s Christians, these represent potentially momentous changes. The formula devised in 1989 to end the fifteen-year civil war shifted the balance of power in a way that clearly disfavoured them: the president was stripped of several prerogatives while the number of parliamentary seats allocated to Christians was brought down from 60 to 50 per cent. The ensuing period was characterised by Syria’s military occupation and the systematic repression of pro-independence Christian movements. Already weakened by a substantial wartime exodus, the Christian community was both leaderless and adrift, contributing to a sense of dispossession that, to this day, shapes its outlook in profound ways.
Syria’s 2005 withdrawal enabled the return and release of key Christian leaders together with the reassertion of core demands. But the Christian political scene split into two camps. On one side, Samir Geagea’s Lebanese Forces and Amine Gemayel’s Phalanges banked on the end of all residual Syrian influence, joined forces with former pro-Syrian actors (a majority of Sunnis and Druze) and called upon the international community to help restore a sovereign Lebanese state. This latter goal would be achieved, in particular, by setting up an international tribunal charged with investigating former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri’s murder, imputed to Damascus, and by pressing for Hizbollah’s disarmament. On the other side, General Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement challenged the political system as a whole, breaking its isolation by forging a controversial understanding with Hizbollah, Syria’s main Lebanese ally.
The first camp defined the priority as genuine sovereignty through which would emerge a strong state capable of carrying out Christian demands. Aoun’s camp, by contrast, argued that its ties to a powerful actor, flexible on all issues other than its armed status, was the optimal way to address the community’s immediate and vital concerns. It also claimed that the emergence of an unchallenged Christian leader (read: Aoun as president) would allow a complete overhaul of the political system.
The tug of war between the two principal Christian camps is hardly over. Much will depend on the 2009 parliamentary elections which will be a test of their respective power and determine the country’s next government. In that sense, the Christian electorate – whose political preferences are by far the least predictable of all – will play a decisive role. Assuming it can play its role deftly, it will be in a position to promote policies it has long advocated. More importantly, it will be in a position to ensure that the country’s political conflicts are resolved within and not in spite of its institutions – through ballots rather than bullets. After one full-blown civil war and another near-miss, that would be no small achievement.
15.7.08
How Hezbollah freed Samir Quntar
From Wikipedia
The Zar'it-Shtula incident was a cross-border attack committed by Lebanon-based Hezbollah special forces on an Israeli military patrol on 12 July 2006 on Israeli territory. The operation was originally named "Freedom for Samir Al-Quntar and his brothers" by Hezbollah, but it was shortened to "Operation Truthful Promise".[1] Using rockets fired on several Israeli towns as a diversion, Hezbollah militants crossed from Lebanon into Israel [2] and ambushed two Israeli Army vehicles, killing three Israeli soldiers and capturing two.
Hezbollah demanded the release of Lebanese prisoners held by Israel in exchange for the release of the abducted soldiers. Israel refused and launched a large-scale military campaign across Lebanon in response to the Hezbollah incursion. This marked the start of the 2006 Lebanon War (more)
14.7.08
Bashar in Paris after seven years: lookalike!
Bashar al-Asad with French President Jacques Chirac outside the Élysée in June 2001. "Cheese, ya Jacques!"
Bashar al-Asad with French President Nicolas Sarkozy outside the Élysée in July 2008. "Fait attention, ya Bashar!"
Naharnet: propaganda campaign?
Naharnet. Firstly, by putting a question-mark in your headline, you do not thereby disclaim the content of the article. Secondly, the only reason Debkafile is being quoted is because it supports Nahar's anti-Hezbullah campaign. Everyone knows that Debkafile is a fat man who makes up the news as he goes along:
Upon instructions from Iran, Hizbullah has set up radar-guided missile positions in Mount Sannine, commandeering the 7,800-foot mountain range, Debka-Net website has revealed. The report said that in the past few weeks Hizbullah seized control of Mount Sannine which it described as a "strategic asset capable of determining the outcome of the next war."
More
Lebanese President Warns He'll Win back Land from Israel
The MediaLine. I wonder what military option Suleiman was thinking of. Did he mean he would use his Hummers?:
Just weeks after Israel’s premier, Ehud Olmert, suggested opening peace talks with Lebanon, the new Lebanese president, Michel Suleiman, has warned his country will retake land he says is occupied by Israel if it is not recovered via diplomatic means. Speaking at a news conference in Paris, Suleiman was referring to the Shib’a Farms area at the confluence of the borders of Israel, Lebanon and Syria. The president stressed the military option would only be a last resort. Olmert has already hinted he may be prepared to cede land in order to reach a permanent deal with Lebanon. Suleiman told reporters any agreement would have to be approved by Syria.
pro-Israel group's plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia
EI:
A pro-Israel pressure group is orchestrating a secret, long-term campaign to infiltrate the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia to rewrite Palestinian history, pass off crude propaganda as fact, and take over Wikipedia administrative structures to ensure these changes go either undetected or unchallenged.A series of emails by members and associates of the pro-Israel group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America), provided to The Electronic Intifada (EI), indicate the group is engaged in what one activist termed a "war" on Wikipedia.
More
Iran: nuclear timeline
An interactive 'nuclear timeline' from the FT:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/635130b4-4911-11dd-9a5f-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
New Yorker mag's 'satire' cover draws Team Obama's ire
Maybe if Remnick, the New Yorkers editor, wasn't a zionist, it would be better taken as satire.
Edde withdraws, again
Carlos Edde: I am no longer part of March 14
People: No-one cares if you are or aren't part of March 14
New cabinet new phonecards?
I love using the phone, because I can always see pictures of my second favorite shaheed. This is how national ministries work in Lebanon. I hope the new communications minister will put my first favourite shaheed, Mr. Mugniye, on the new phonecards.
Lookalikes
Top, Ron Arad, with his ex-wife Meg Mathews. Bottom, Noel Gallagher, the cheeky Mancunian brains behind Oasis.
13.7.08
U.S. Targets Telcom Firm, Duty-Free Stores across Syria
The Media Line:
The United States Treasury has blacklisted Syria’s largest mobile phone company Syriatel and the duty-free chain Ramak because both are directly or indirectly owned by Rami Makhluf. “Rami Makhluf uses his access to high-level Syrian Government insiders to enrich himself at the expense of the Syrian people,” said Adam J. Szubin, Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control at the Treasury. “We will continue to target Makhluf and his commercial empire as well as others who follow in his footsteps.” Makhluf himself was designated by the Treasury in February. A cousin of President Bashar Al-Asad, he is alleged “to have contributed to, or to have benefited from, the public corruption of senior officials of the Syrian regime.” The news came as reports from Damascus suggested Al-Asad is looking to improve ties with Washington.
President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran
The only clarity there is to be had on the US position on a stike on Iran is that there is serious division in the administration, between the white house, pentagon and state department:
President George W Bush has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official.
Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread scepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran, the president has given an “amber light” to an Israeli plan to attack Iran’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4322508.ece
LEBANON'S MILITIA WARS
This essay is as good as F. Khazen's work on Lebanon, its single source. It has a few interesting, if not novel, things to say, though it reads a little too much like an undergrad essay:
Lebanon's civil war has been one of the most complex, multifaceted wars of modern times due to its hybrid nature, multiple participants (both state and non-state actors), and its impact on regional, and even global balances of power.
The goal of this article is to identify the principal combatants during the various stages of the war, their equipment, and tactics, with an emphasis on urban warfare and military operations in built-up areas. In this context, the focus is on the Lebanese participants and not the regular, state armies involved: the Syrian Arab Army and the Israel Defense Forces. However, Syria and Israel were intimately involved in the war, and Syria in particular cannot be separated from various key battles that took place on its orders and/or through its direct intervention either with its regular armed forces or proxies.
In addition, since Palestinian military capabilities and preparedness have been covered far more than their Lebanese counterparts, they will not be addressed in extensive detail here.[1]
Finally, the 2008 Hizballah military operation in Beirut and the Shuf Mountains will be examined and compared with the civil war to see what lessons can be drawn today, especially in light of this crucial development.
http://www.meriajournal.com/en/asp/journal/2008/june/badran/index.asp
12.7.08
U.S. 'Aid' to Lebanon Continues
With "285 Humvees, 200 cargo trucks, helicopter repair parts, assault rifles, grenade launchers, anti-tank weapons and urban warfare bunker weapons, with another 300 Humvees, mobile communications systems, and coastal patrol craft to come" - Lebanon can surely defend itself against Israel. I mean, who needs anti-aircraft missles when you have - Hummers? Those urban warfare bunker weapons will certainly be of use when being invaded, as will the mobile phones.
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2406
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
