Shiites Quit Lebanese Government

Five pro-Syrian Shi'ite Muslim ministers from Hezbollah and its ally, the Amal movement, resigned from Lebanon's cabinet on Saturday after the collapse of all-party talks on giving their camp more say in government.

The resignation of all the Shi'ite ministers from the 24-member Western-backed cabinet came two days before it was scheduled to discuss a draft U.N. document setting up a tribunal to try the killers of former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri.

Many Lebanese blame Syria for Hariri's killing but Damascus denies involvement.

While the resignations will not bring down the government, they pose a major challenge to the majority anti-Syrian coalition in a country where the political system is based on a delicate sectarian balance….

"The two groups allied to Syria said the anti-Syrian majority had rejected their demands for a decisive say in government during week-long talks that collapsed earlier in the day.

The escalating political crisis could provoke confrontation on the streets of Beirut at a time of rising tension between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims.

"Things will get worse. There will be a protest move soon," a senior political source close to Hezbollah said earlier. "The climate at today's meeting was very bad. This stand (by the anti-Syrian) majority will not pass without reaction."

"I don't know who is spreading a climate of fear and tension as if something is about to happen. Nothing will happen," said Samir Geagea, leader of the Lebanese Forces, a Christian party in the anti-Syrian camp.

The pro-Syrian party has threatened mass demonstrations demanding new parliamentary elections unless more of its allies are admitted to the cabinet by mid-November.

Hezbollah accuses Siniora of failing to back it during the war and of supporting U.S. and Israeli demands for the disarmament of its guerillas.

The majority coalition is willing to bring in Christian opposition leader Michel Aoun, a Hezbollah ally, but not to surrender a third of seats to the opposition. A third of ministers plus one can block motions in cabinet and automatically bring down the government by resigning.  

Saniora on Saturday called for a Cabinet meeting to be held Monday to vote on the UN draft document. But in a sign of escalating tensions, pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud rejected the request.

The White House statement said one of Syria's goals was to prevent the Lebanese government from establishing an international tribunal to try those accused of involvement in the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

"Any such effort to sideline the tribunal will fail, however, for the international community can proceed with establishing it no matter what happens internally in Lebanon," the statement said.

Jumblatt — who will have talks at the United Nations about the tribunal — said that Nasrallah's main goal is to prevent the court from being established and to "defend the Syrian regime."

Hypocrisy Watch: Rumsfeld objects to being tried for torture by international court.

Charges sought against Rumsfeld over prison abuse
By Adam Zagorin, Time, November 10, 2006

Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides "universal jurisdiction" allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a "a big, big problem." U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.

Lebanese parliament speaker Nabih Berri left Beirut for Tehran on Saturday after praising Iran's continued support for strengthening national unity in Beirut.

The two leaders will not discuss the renewal of Syrian-Israeli talks.

He added that the U.S. understands why Israel feels the need to continue intelligence-gathering overflights in Lebanon, but said that Washington is also concerned that these may serve Hezbollah with an excuse for violating the cease-fire.

The two leaders will not discuss the renewal of Syrian-Israeli talks.

"If Syria wants to convince us that she is interested in peace, she knows what she must do," the senior U.S. official said. "We have had so many expectations from Syria that did not manifest themselves that we are tired of the Syrians. The Israeli government does not appear interested in talking with Syria," he added.

 This sets in motion the process of creating a "tribunal with an international character" as authorized by the U.N. Security Council to try suspects in the bombing that transformed Lebanon. The next step would be for the Lebanese government to approve the draft document in a meeting that could take place next week. An approved draft would the go to Parliament to be passed into law.

The government is dominated by anti-Syrian supporters of the late Hariri, but President Emile Lahoud, a staunch pro-Syrian, objected to some points in an earlier draft and declared it would not pass without his approval.

The real reason Olmert won't talk is because the Bush administration won't let him, something the administration hasn't even tried to hide. As far as Bush is concerned, Syria is an auxiliary member of the axis of evil, and you don't talk to them, you freeze them out, keep them guessing whether you're going to regime-change their asses, and wait for them to come begging.

This strategy has worked about as well with Syria as it has with Iran and North Korea, and about as well as the crusade for democracy has worked in Iraq. It may be about to change. Between the congressional election results and the exit strategy from Iraq being devised by the forceful diplomat James Baker, Bush could decide that on second thought, maybe Israel and Syria ought to sit down and try to settle their differences. Right away.

WHAT WOULD Olmert say to that? He'd say, "Yes, sir." And Assad and everybody else would understand that Israel, as it had done under Rabin, Barak and Netanyahu, was offering Syria the Golan Heights in return for peace.

Patrick Seale writes in his article, "Syria's Peace Offensive"

"The Israelis need to learn that the world is changing," Mr Muallem says. "Force cannot achieve political goals. Israel’s occupation of Arab territory is the great obstacle to peace and security. If Israel wants to belong to this region – if it wants to live at peace with its neighbours – it needs to come to terms with the new realities. Peace can create a win-win situation for everyone. We in Syria want to play a constructive role." 

The Syrians have great hopes that James Baker and Lee Hamilton, co-chairman of America’s bipartisan Iraq Study Group will not only help President Bush extricate the United States from Iraq, but will also change American policy towards the whole region. The Democratic victory at this week’s mid-term elections has encouraged expectations that America will now correct its aim in the Middle East.

James Baker, former American Secretary of State, is greatly respected in Damascus. He promised the late President Hafez al-Assad that he would launch a peace process immediately after the war to liberate Kuwait, and he kept his promise. The result was the Madrid peace conference of 1991.

Foreign Minister Muallem explains that this precedent is very much in President Bashar al-Assad’s mind. The Syrians believe that Baker would not have taken the job if he had not received assurances from President Bush that serious attention would be given to his advice.

The mood in Damascus was joyful as the Republican defeat in the US congressional elections and the resignation of defense secretary  Donald Rumsfeld were vibrating throughout political circles in the Arab world.

The Syrians, after all, long for a bygone era of an America ruled by the Americans when Syrian-US relations were at their finest: "The America of Jimmy Carter and the one of Bill Clinton," as one Ba'athist put it. This time, however, the Democrat victory will probably not lead to a new honeymoon in Syrian-US relations, as some Syrians imagine.

It will, however, make any new adventure by Bush, such as an attack on Iran, close to impossible. It will also dramatically change US policy in Iraq, but is not likely to lead to changes vis-a-vis the Palestine-Israeli conflict, or Syrian-US relations.

Republicans and Democrats having the moral courage to face certain obvious facts. These include that thanks mainly to America's own actions, Iran is now in a much stronger regional position; that to try to exclude Iran from major influence in Iraq and Afghanistan is now impossible; and that however unfortunate this may be, Iran's support for Hezbollah's struggle with Israel has the approval of most Muslims.

In these circumstances, for America to go on refusing to talk directly to the Iranians is doing more damage to the United States than to Iran.

It is doing even worse damage to Iraq and Afghanistan – countries for which the United States has taken responsibility, and which will be extremely dependent on Iranian good will.

Talking to Iran and Syria will mean a certain loss of face for the United States. Any eventual overall settlement with these countries will fall short of maximum U.S. and Israeli wishes.

But elected U.S. officials need to have the courage to ask themselves the following tough questions, and then act upon the answers: Given what has happened in Iraq, does America have any chance of achieving its present stated goals with regard to Iran and Syria?

If not, when is it better to start looking for a compromise: today, or in two years' time, when thousands more U.S. servicemen will have been killed and maimed?

The Damascus regime has survived the fallout of war in Iraq and turmoil in Lebanon. There will be no overall solution to the middle-east crisis without Damascus, but a closer look suggests that Bashar al-Assad's time is running out, argues Carsten Wieland.

Syria warns Israel that it will rekindle 'resistance' within months to liberate the Golan Heights if Israel does not move toward opening up peace negotiations. Aaron Klein in ynetnews.com Nov. 8. Also read: Syria Calls to Boost Culture of Resistance

Vice-president Cheney faces isolation over Iran and Syria after key ally leaves Pentagon: Guardian

However, that does not mean that Mr Cheney's influence is at an end. He has a formidable staff within the White House and remains an important influence on the president. "He's isolated but you know when you corner a dangerous animal, it doesn't make him any less dangerous," said a senior Democratic foreign policy official. "He's going to continue to push for what he believes in. It doesn't mean he's going to put his toys away and go home."

Melvin Goodman, a former CIA official who worked under Mr Gates, expressed doubts that Mr Gates has the strength of conviction to stand up to Mr Cheney. "He never has, so it would be the first time," said Mr Goodman, now a senior fellow at the Centre for International Policy.

Syria gave members of the Democratic Union Party (PYD), which is connected to the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), heavy prison sentences in a surprise move.

PKK militants had attempted to organize a demonstration to celebrate the founding of the PYD. Syrian security forces, however, did not give permission for the demonstration, resulting in a conflict in which125 people were detained and sent to a Damascus prison.

The PKK members were tried by the court and sentenced from 10 to 30 years imprisonment on charges of belonging to a terrorist organization, provoking national and class conflicts through violence and trying to bind Syrian lands to a foreign country.

Lawyer for the defense, Enver Bunni, emphasized that Syria has cracked down on the PKK and added many PKK sympathizers were arrested while protesting the verdict for the PYD members.

In the past, Turkey-Syria relations were tense as PKK Leader Abdullah Ocalan had sought refuge there; however, relations improved after Ocalan was banished from the country and the two countries signed the Adana Correspondence in 1998 to take concrete steps to prevent PKK terrorism.

The Damascus administration has handed 70 PKK members to Turkey to date, including top-level administrators in the terrorist organization.

The new European Parliament resolution recommending that the Council sign the Euro-Med Association Agreement with Syria is significant. (Copied below: thanks to Maureen Thompson for sending it)

If it is adopted, which is should be, it will mean that Europe has definitively broken with the US policy of isolating Syria.

There are many caveats in the recommendation concerning democracy, human rights and Lebanon. Nevertheless, the thrust of the proposal is that Europe signs the agreement with Syria as a trust-building measure to win Syrian advances on the policy shifts Europe wants.

This means reward Syria first to win Syrian concessions later. It is the opposite of the Bush doctrine: punish Syria first to win concessions down the road. It means a return to the carrot rather than the stick and an end to hopes for an official policy of regime-change.

Now that Rumsfeld is out and  the Baker plan (dialogue with Syria) seems to be in, there is no reason why this recommended resolution will not pass the EU Council.

Europe's break with Washington came during the Lebanon War, when France and Britain both found they could not sustain their alliance with Bush. France signed up with Washington to pursue a common Syria-Lebanon policy following the Lahoud presidential extension – a decision that was set in stone with the Hariri murder. France did this not only to avenge the murder of a close friend – Hariri, but also to establish common ground with the US, following the their nasty separation over the Iraq invasion, which

France stood against on the grounds that it was a illegal and a breach of multilateral politics and serious contravention of the spirit of UN resolutions and international will.By joining with Washington on Lebanon polity, France was determined to teach Bush and his team that multilateral politics works. That international law and working through the UN makes good foreign policy. Following international law is not only something the weak do, it is something the strong can benefit from. It is the foundation of all wise and sustainable foreign policy. This is what Chirac and French bureaucrats hoped to prove to Washington by leading them through UN resolution and by getting the EU to work with Washington.

The Lebanon War proved that France had failed. Washington had learned nothing. It was impatient. It reverted to type and decided to use military force to break through the Lebanese impasse over Hizbullah that was challenged US policies.

Tony Blair had to jettison the war effort because his party threatened full scale revolt during the war. He turned toward engagement with Syria and sent his adviser off to Damascus to meet Asad. Germany did the same. Seeing that none of its leading states had the stomach to continue following Washington, the EU is now recommending that it return to its pre-9-11 policy of accommodating Asad even though he is an authoritarian and does not rule according to law.

The Meaning of the Gates Appointment:

The appointment of Bob Gates as Secretary of Defence means that George Bush the father’s team is back in. They will have to fight hard to take over policy toward Iraq, but they have a foot in the door. It is a positive sign that the Baker agenda will move forward, even though there are no plans for engaging Syria at the time.

The National Security Council under Stephen J. Hadley, a longtime Cheney associate has its foot on Syria policy, which means it is really under Elliott Abrams, “a dyed-in-the-wool neoconservative with close ties to Feith and Perle, was appointed in December 2002 as the NSC's top Middle East aide.

According to Jim Lobe, when Elliott was hired, the neocons in the Cheney’s office and the Office of Special Plans “were whooping and hollering, 'We got him in, we got him in'." "They worked really hard for Abrams; he was a necessary link."

For Gates and Baker to make any headway, they will have to get rid of people like Elliott Abrams, who will be able to scuttle an opening to Syria.

Here is the EU Resolution 

European Parliament resolution containing the European Parliament's recommendation to the Council on the conclusion of a Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Syrian Arab Republic, of the other part (2006/2150(INI))

The European Parliament ,

–   having regard to the proposal for a recommendation to the Council by Véronique De Keyser on behalf of the PSE Group on the negotiations with a view to the conclusion of a Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Syrian Arab Republic, of the other part (B6-0373/2006),

–   having regard to the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of a Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Syrian Arab Republic, of the other part (COM (2004)0808),

–   having regard to its previous resolutions on Syria, and particularly those of 8 September 2005 on the situation of political prisoners in Syria(1) and of 15 June 2006 on Syria(2) ,

–   having regard to the Seventh European Parliament–Syria Interparliamentary Meeting, held in Syria from 11 to 18 June 2005,–   having regard to the Barcelona Declaration of 28 November 1995 and Parliament's resolution of 27 October 2005 on the Barcelona Process revisited(3) ,

–   having regard to the UN resolutions on relations between Syria and Lebanon, particularly UN Security Council Resolutions 1559(2004) of 2 September 2004 and 1701(2006) of 11 August 2006, and the recent report of 25 September 2006 by Mr Serge Brammertz, Commissioner of the UN International Independent Investigation Commission, investigating, in accordance with the Security Council's resolutions, the fatal attack on the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri,

–   having regard to Rules 83

(5) and 45 of its Rules of Procedure,–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A6-0334/2006),

A.   whereas Syria is of geostrategic importance in this region of the Near and Middle East, mainly in view of its potential role as a link between the parties in the peace process and a facilitator of a resolution of the regional conflict; whereas this role could be enhanced by stepping up the dialogue with that country,

B.   whereas at present the elements necessary for the signing of an association agreement between the European Community and Syria are not yet fulfilled, but whereas Parliament is convinced that Syria has the potential to meet the necessary conditions,

C.   whereas the Iraq war, Syria's strategic relations with Iran and its involvement in the affairs of Lebanon have all impacted on Syria's relations with its neighbours and the wider international community,

D.   whereas the aim of the agreement between the European Community and Syria is to encourage and support the transition to a democratic political system respecting human rights and civil liberties and an open and market-based economy, while remaining within the framework of an effective dialogue and real partnership,

E.   whereas Syria has already adopted a number of economic measures advocated by the forthcoming association agreement,

F.   whereas the protection of fundamental freedoms is the foundation for any development towards a strong and independent civil society and whereas the government's position has in recent years been ambiguous but has nevertheless encouraged some hope for a greater opening-up of the Syrian political system,

G.   whereas in spite of its active and constructive participation in the Barcelona Process, Syria is the only country with which the European Community has not yet signed an association agreement, thus preventing the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership from fully developing,

H.   whereas the decree of March 1963 on the state of emergency and all the legislative acts relating to it are still in force today, although the recommendations following the tenth regional congress of the Baath Party (held from 6 to 9 June 2005) provided for their review,

I.   whereas the conclusions of the UN International Independent Investigation Commission, mentioned above, are a fundamental element for the signing of a future association agreement,

J.   whereas the human rights situation in the country has worsened since Parliament's last resolution on Syria of 15 June 2006, mentioned above, and whereas the activists detained in May 2006 for signing a petition calling for improved Syrian-Lebanese relations have not all been released,

1.  Is convinced that the association agreement could give a decisive impetus to the political, economic and social reforms needed to improve the country's situation;

2.  Reiterates, however, that respect for democratic values, human rights and civil liberties are prerequisites, and that, to this end, an effective control mechanism should be included in the agreement's human rights clause; calls, in particular, for greater respect for ethnic minorities and reiterates the need to maintain freedom of religion;

3.  Believes that anchoring Syria firmly within the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership will reinforce Syria's relations with the Member States of the European Union and its partners in the Southern Mediterranean, and facilitate the Middle East peace process;4.  Questions the Council and Commission on the next steps towards signing the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement, initialled as long ago as 19 October 2004;5.  Asks the Council to strengthen its initiatives with a view to deepening the cooperation between the EU and Syria and ultimately signing that agreement, while taking account of the following recommendations:

	—	• encourage and support actions by the Syrian Government towards the establishment of a democratic system;
	—	• call on Syria to respect Lebanon's sovereignty and abstain from interfering in its internal affairs, in particular by stopping arms supplies and preventing Hezbollah militias from rearming in full cooperation with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), and make renewed efforts to restart a credible peace process in the region leading to a comprehensive settlement and the restitution to Damascus of the Golan Heights;
	—	• take account of the political signals emanating from the tenth regional congress of the Baath Party, of which the most conspicuous is the change in the leadership team to include younger figures close to President Al-Assad, as is shown by the appointment of Abdullah Dardari as deputy prime minister;
	—	• give particular attention to the application of the clauses in the association agreement seeking to make public contracts more transparent; call on the Commission to ensure that other bilateral or multilateral agreements follow that approach;
	—	• call on the Syrian Government to adopt measures in the fields of democracy and human rights so as to comply with international human rights law as regards respect for freedom of expression, the protection of human rights defenders, the prevention of and the fight against torture and the abolition of the death penalty; in particular, draw attention to the necessary reform of the Syrian associations law so as to end all major restrictions as regards the activities of human rights organisations;
	—	• nevertheless, put to the Syrian Government its serious concerns about the absence of progress in such areas as opening up to multi-party politics and respect for human rights and civil liberties; point out that respect for human rights constitutes a vital component of the association agreement and call on Syria to respect its commitments within the framework of the Barcelona Process and along the lines of the European Neighbourhood Policy; to that end and in that context, call on Syria to do what is needed to immediately lift the state of emergency;
	—	• call on the Syrian Government to reconsider the cases of political prisoners and release all prisoners of conscience and peace activists, and to allow the existence of groups such as the signatories of the Damascus Declaration, signed on 16 October 2005 by five proscribed parties and by independent personalities, and the signatories of the Beirut-Damascus/Damascus-Beirut Declaration of 12 May 2006; call on Syria to ensure that detained or imprisoned persons are well treated, not subjected to torture and given prompt, regular and unrestricted access to their lawyers, doctors and families; encourage the Syrian Government to cooperate fully with the Lebanese Government, in accordance with the agreement of 5 May 2005 between the Prime Ministers of Syria and Lebanon, to obtain concrete results in the cases of disappearances of Syrian and Lebanese nationals, within the purview of the joint investigative commission created to that end;
	—	• denounce before the Syrian Government – as the European Parliament has done in its above-mentioned resolution of 15 June 2006 – the wave of arrests in response to the Beirut-Damascus/Damascus-Beirut Declaration, that declaration being the first joint initiative by Syrian and Lebanese intellectuals and human rights defenders, and call for their immediate release;
	—	• address the concerns of the European Union with regard to respecting the rights of religious and other minorities, and of the Kurds in particular; call on the Syrian Government to report on the state of progress with these issues;
	—	• re-open a genuine dialogue with Syria with a view to involving it in peace efforts towards an overall settlement of the Middle East conflict;
	—	• urge Syria to play a constructive role in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions 1559(2004) and 1701(2006), and call on it specifically to step up controls on its side of the Syria-Lebanon border so as to prevent the supply of arms to non-state entities;
	—	• point out that cooperation by the Syrian authorities with the UN International Independent Investigation Commission has improved, but insist that it be further stepped up and that practical action be taken to follow up the investigation and comply with its findings;
	—	• insist that Syria comply fully with UN Security Council Resolutions 1559(2004), 1562(2004), 1680(2006) and 1701(2006) and with the European Council's declaration on Lebanon adopted at its meeting of 16 and 17 June 2006, which call on Syria and Lebanon to delineate their common frontier so as to reinforce regional stability; call on Syria to make a positive contribution to the clarification of the final status of the Shebaa Farms area in accordance with the UN Secretary-General's recommendations of 12 September 2006 and in compliance with international law;
	—	• note positively in this connection the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanese territory, yet call firmly on the Syrian Government to establish formal diplomatic relations with Lebanon, which has so far been refused, and to stop supporting Hezbollah;
	—	• call on the Syrian Government to give an account of its practical actions to combat the proliferation of weapons, terrorism and al-Qa'ida and on the control of its frontiers with a view to prohibiting the smuggling of weapons and the crossing of terrorists into neighbouring countries;
	—	• deplore in this connection the signing of a military agreement concluded with Iran on 15 June 2006 on strengthening mutual cooperation in the face of American and Israeli "threats";
	—	• draw the attention of Syria to the importance of its potential role in the Near and Middle East for the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the region; address the concerns over provision by Syria of support to Damascus-based Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad at the expense of moderate Palestinian forces seeking coexistence and peace with Israel;
	—	• call on the Syrian Government to improve the living and environmental conditions of Palestinian refugee camps in Syria in accordance with international human rights standards;
	—	• call on the Syrian Government to release Yacoub Hanna Shamoun, an Assyrian Christian who has been incarcerated for over twenty years without due process or a release date in the near future;
	—	• exercise caution in the repatriation to Syria of immigrants and refugees belonging to religious minorities as long as repression continues; and, in any event, improve coordination of the different Member States" national approaches to this issue;
	—	• call for support for a dialogue between Syria and the European Parliament on these various points, so as to go forward with the cooperation between the EU and Syria with the expectation of signing the association agreement;

 6.  Requests the Council to consider additional incentives and benefits for Syria, going beyond those granted through the association agreement, in order to encourage Syria to review its current foreign policy and regional alignment in ways that will help promote regional peace, stability and prosperity and, in particular, recognition of the State of Israel's right to exist and support by Syria for progress in the Middle East peace process;7.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution containing the European Parliament's recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the Government and Majlis al-Sha'ab of the Syrian Arab Republic.

IDF preparing for another conflict by next summer

By Amir Oren: Haaretz

.
Syria and Hezbollah are likely to start a war against Israel next summer, according to General Staff assessments that have been gathered during a series of meetings in recent weeks. While there is no specific estimate concerning the timing of a potential attack, all preparations are being made to ensure maximum preparedness in advance of summer, 2007.

BEIRUT: Israel is bracing itself for a possible new war with Lebanon, the chief of operations for the Jewish state's northern border area said on Monday. "We are preparing for a second war … and we are very optimistic, but on our side we must do everything to prepare for a worst-case scenario and we are readying for a scenario that [UN Security Council] Resolution 1701 will not succeed," said Lieutenant Colonel Guy Hazoot.

Resolution 1701 ended a brutal 34-day Israeli bombardment that demolished much of Lebanon's infrastructure, displaced one quarter of the population and killed and wounded over 5,000 people.

"We will not give Hizbullah the opportunity to come back to these positions," Hazoot said, gesturing to Lebanese territory across the border.

Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Monday that according to military assessments, Hizbullah and Syria "are likely to start a war against Israel next summer" and "all preparations are being made to ensure maximum preparedness."

Several top Israeli officials have said the Jewish state must prepare for a second round of hostilities with the militia, which it says is armed by Syria and Iran. Both Damascus and Tehran deny the charge.

Hizbullah media officer Hussein Rahhal told The Daily Star on Monday that the Israeli threat was real.

"The Israelis continue to reveal aggressive intentions towards Lebanon all the time," Rahhal said. "That is why we have to take into consideration that the major military power deployed along our southern borderline can, at any moment and under any pretext or without an excuse, launch an attack on us. … The Israeli generals' statements are the clearest proof that the resistance's reasoning is true. The resistance has to be ready to face any attack at all times. There has to be conformity between the resistance and the Lebanese Army and the role of the government and that of the people."

According to Rahhal, "this is the only way to confront Israel, because we are a weak country. The strength of Lebanon lies in the unity of its resistance, people and army in the face of Israel."

Resolution 1701 ended a brutal 34-day Israeli bombardment that demolished much of Lebanon's infrastructure, displaced one quarter of the population and killed and wounded over 5,000 people.

"We will not give Hizbullah the opportunity to come back to these positions," Hazoot said, gesturing to Lebanese territory across the border.

Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Monday that according to military assessments, Hizbullah and Syria "are likely to start a war against Israel next summer" and "all preparations are being made to ensure maximum preparedness."

Several top Israeli officials have said the Jewish state must prepare for a second round of hostilities with the militia, which it says is armed by Syria and Iran. Both Damascus and Tehran deny the charge.

Hizbullah media officer Hussein Rahhal told The Daily Star on Monday that the Israeli threat was real.

"The Israelis continue to reveal aggressive intentions towards Lebanon all the time," Rahhal said. "That is why we have to take into consideration that the major military power deployed along our southern borderline can, at any moment and under any pretext or without an excuse, launch an attack on us. … The Israeli generals' statements are the clearest proof that the resistance's reasoning is true. The resistance has to be ready to face any attack at all times. There has to be conformity between the resistance and the Lebanese Army and the role of the government and that of the people."

According to Rahhal, "this is the only way to confront Israel, because we are a weak country. The strength of Lebanon lies in the unity of its resistance, people and army in the face of Israel."

The top three headlines of Levant News, the London based webjournal with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and new National Salvation Front which includes Abdulhalim Khaddam, Syria's ex-vice president suggest that Bashar al-Asad is setting the terms for a deal between the Syrian regime and the West. Like Lebanon's Jumblat, the Syria opposition is dead set against such a deal.

According to the Ibrahime al-Amine article, (published in a separate post) the Saudis are looking for a broader deal on Lebanon, which would require coming to terms with Syria. Both Egypt and Saudi tried to broker such a Syria-Lebanon deal btween Hariri and the Shiites on the one hand and between Lebanon and Syria on the other last winter. Washington, Jumblat and Geagea scuttled it. Now the Saudis are trying again, Amine claims, realizing that the Americans cannot win and that the Lebanese state is too weak to avoid compromise. The way forward is to get the Shiites more cabinet seats and to work out a deal with Michel Aoun about the upcoming presidential elections.

The United States and Jumblat remain determined to avoid any deals with Syria or Hizbullah.

Here is what Akhbar al-Sharq is saying about the rumors of a deal.

1. Asad presents a complete package to the British: Dropping Hamas and Hizbullah in exchange for realizing Syria demands [on returning the Golan, according to officials close to the British PM]

2. The French confirm that the results of European contacts with the Syrian regime have not been encouraging.

3. Syrian Authorities are forbidding Syrian Rights activists from leaving the country.

????? ???? ????? "????????" ???????????: ?????? ?? "????" ?"??? ????" ????? ????? ??????? ???????

????????? ?????? ?? ????? ????????? ????????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????

??????? ??????? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??????

Khaddam's newsletters are insisting that a leading Arab official claims that Asad has intimated he will suggest that some rogue elements from the security were involved in the Hariri murder but that the regime was innocent.

Al-Hayat writes: "If reports on a Syrian offer to British envoy Nigel Sheinwald to trade Syrian pressure over Hezbollah and Hamas in exchange for kick starting the negotiations on the Golan Heights were true, then it would also at least entail convincing Olmert with the need to advance along the Syrian track: a possibility that Olmert adamantly rules out.

Alex commenting below, doubts that Syria will be satisfied with only the Golan. He explains:

I believe this is too simplistic … The problem with Syria is that, unlike Egypt and Jordan, the Syrians want to manage the same area the Israel would like to keep in its own sphere of influence .. Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinians

Two reasons:
1) Greater Syria … don’t believe anyone who tells you the idea is totally forgotten.
2) The Syrians simply do not trust Israel or the Americans to know how to maintain the stability and secular nature of the area.

German chancellor Angela Merkel: "We can't deny that Syria is a main regional player in the region," German News Agency DPA quoted Merkel as saying during her talks with British Premier Tony Blair in London last night.

Patrick Seale's "Has America ‘lost’ the Middle East" questions whether Richard Haass' prediction in Foreign Affairs is true – Haass wrote that America's moment in the Middle East is over. Like Charles G. Coutinho, commenting on this site, Seale questions whether Washington's influence is really about to end. He doubts it and calls for another US effort to solve the thorny Palestinian-Israeli mess. He is a bit of Seale's argument:

Perhaps the first thing to say is that, in spite of its recent failures, the US is still not seriously challenged in the Middle East by any other external power or group of powers.

The Iraq war may have all the makings of a major disaster, but what other power could afford to spend $500 billion and deploy an army of 140,000 men for an indefinite period halfway across the world? The European Union, which many had hoped would serve as a counterweight to the United States, has conspicuously failed to forge a common foreign and defence policy.

Because of its spectacular economic growth, China is emerging as a strategic challenger to the United States, particularly in East Asia.

But China’s economic partnerships and alliances have still not been translated into the sort of naked power the United States can project by means of its numerous deepwater fleets, its global network of military bases and its technological supremacy.

Russia’s economy, in turn, has improved on the basis of oil and gas revenues, but it is still very far from recovering the considerable influence it used to have in the Middle East as an arms supplier and great power protector of several Arab states.

As for local actors, which Haass predicts will soon “enjoy the upper hand”; it is hard to see whom he has in mind. All too often at odds with each other, the Arabs are even more divided than the Europeans.

Iran poses a more serious challenge to American power, but its ambitions would seem to be purely local and defensive.

As for non-state actors, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, they pose no credible challenge whatsoever to the United States.

Baker Panel To Avoid Calls for Peace Push
Sources Dismiss Israeli Fears, Predict U.S. Talks With Syria and Iran
Nathan Guttman | The Jewish Forward | Wed. Nov 01, 2006

Israeli officials have been privately expressing alarm over the influential role that Baker — who during the first Bush administration famously butted heads with Jerusalem over settlements and peace talks — is expected to play in crafting Middle East policy following the midterm elections next week.

The fear in some pro-Israel circles is that Baker and Hamilton, who have both previously stressed the importance of achieving a comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement, would propose a formula that would implicitly require White House pressure on Jerusalem. But sources close to the study group, and experts who advised the committee on the regional policies, all say that the report will not urge a change of course on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and will not advocate a more active role for the United States in brokering peace in the Middle East.

“It simply won’t be in there,” said one of the sources, who asked to remain anonymous.

Ibrahime al-Amine, "Will Washington agree to Riyadh’s initiative…?” in al-Akhbar, Nov. 3 (Thanks to mideastwire.com translation)

Ibrahime Al-Amine, chairman of the board of directors of Al Akhbar, an independent newspaper, commented in its November 3 issue about the latest developments in the Lebanese internal issue. Al-Amine wrote: “It seems that matters are headed towards a tougher confrontation than the Lebanese expected. The country is not moving toward a civil war but what is certain is that the governing team has exceeded for the first time the borders of the internal game with its regional dimensions and placed itself in the custody of the United States and France, thus linking everything, even its political fate, to the American agenda in the region. This is what has been revealed so far by the unannounced results of the talks held by MP Walid Jumblatt in the United States from which the man returned with higher morale and with a promise that there is no room for any American-Syrian settlement in the foreseeable future and that Washington had isolated once and for all the Lebanese issue from what is taking place between it and Syria.”

Al-Amine added: “It seems that the agreement was assured because of the consideration that the current opposition to the government is only a tool in a Syrian project which aims at achieving a coup d'état against the current situation to force the United States into talks with it to formulate a new compromise for the situation in Lebanon. Despite the fact that Riyadh is expending efforts, that might constitute the final attempt before the outbreak of the confrontation, the reality of the situation points to the fact that both sides, even if they went to the dialogue table, are preparing for the end confrontation. The decisive talk announced by the secretary general of Hezbollah Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah isn’t related only to the internal calculations linked to the behaviour of the ruling team but also reflects the size of the pressure applied by the United States on Lebanon to force it to remain within a certain circles under the threat of total political and economic isolation and maybe even exposing the country to conflicts that might lead to the current fate of Iraq.”

Al-Amine continued: “The sharp American attitude towards the opposition forces started leaking out through the attitude and letters delivered by the American ambassador Jeffery Feltman directly as he tells his visitors that his country can’t remain neutral about what her enemies want in Lebanon. He adds that his country stands alongside the government and alongside its supporters and that it will not abandon them. But Feltman, who knows that matters are getting more complicated than ever, stops at the Saudi initiative whose success seems linked in the first place to the American attitude itself which seems not to have been settled in the direction of calming things down especially as Lebanon already has had an experience with the United States and the Saudi initiatives when Riyadh worked last winter to make the poles of the quadruple alliance agree so two officials from the Amal movement and Hezbollah went to Saudi Arabia and met with MP Sa’d Al-Hariri and agreed upon a mechanism to manage the governmental situation according to prearranged political agreements as was decided before the elections.

"Then as soon as Hariri’s positive report came out, objections rose in Beirut from MP Jumblatt and the head of the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea who then admitted that these objections were reached through coordination with the United States which promised to take care of the Saudis, thus the result was that the whole Saudi effort was sabotaged.”

Al-Amine added: “Today, the Saudi and Egyptian ambassadors say that parliamentary speaker Nabih Birri’s initiative must be supported not through answering his call for dialogue but by agreeing on the principle of discussing the issue of forming a national unity government through expanding or the government or switching some positions. Saudi Arabia hastened to prove this desire by informing the poles of the opposition Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic movement. This was accompanied by directing an invitation to General Aoun to visit Saudi Arabia as soon as possible. What is even more important is that the coordination between the majority team and the United States seems now to have crossed the regional axes which aroused unprecedented talk about ‘Saudi annoyance’ at the behaviour of some of the prominent figures in the majority team but that the translation of this annoyance remains within closed rooms even if the Saudi side is more anxious than before to applaud Prime Minister Fu’ad Al-Sanyurah while not providing the traditional cover for the statements of MP Al-Hariri…” (Al Akhbar, Lebanon; MEW Nov 3)

See also Rami Khoury,"Is Lebanon the Hub of a New Cold War?" interviewed by Seth Walls on MSNBC website Nov 3, 2006.

Now They Tell Us Neo Culpa
Vanity Fair by David Rose, November 3, 2006  

As Iraq slips further into chaos, the war's neoconservative boosters have turned sharply on the Bush administration, charging that their grand designs have been undermined by White House incompetence. In a series of exclusive interviews, Richard Perle, Kenneth Adelman, David Frum, and others play the blame game with shocking frankness. Target No. 1: the president himself.

.

Richard Perle

Perle says, "The decisions did not get made that should have been. They didn't get made in a timely fashion, and the differences were argued out endlessly.… At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible.… I don't think he realized the extent of the opposition within his own administration, and the disloyalty."

.

"I think if I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?,' I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.' … I don't say that because I no longer believe that Saddam had the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, or that he was not in contact with terrorists. I believe those two premises were both correct. Could we have managed that threat by means other than a direct military intervention? Well, maybe we could have."

.

David Frum

To David Frum, the former White House speechwriter who co-wrote Bush's 2002 State of the Union address that accused Iraq of being part of an "axis of evil," it now looks as if defeat may be inescapable, because "the insurgency has proven it can kill anyone who cooperates, and the United States and its friends have failed to prove that it can protect them." This situation, he says, must ultimately be blamed on "failure at the center"—starting with President Bush.

"I always believed as a speechwriter that if you could persuade the president to commit himself to certain words, he would feel himself committed to the ideas that underlay those words. And the big shock to me has been that although the president said the words, he just did not absorb the ideas. And that is the root of, maybe, everything."

.

Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute freedom scholar: "Ask yourself who the most powerful people in the White House are. They are women who are in love with the president: Laura [Bush], Condi, Harriet Miers, and Karen Hughes."

Frank Gaffney, an assistant secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan and founder of the Center for Security Policy: "[Bush] doesn't in fact seem to be a man of principle who's steadfastly pursuing what he thinks is the right course. He talks about it, but the policy doesn't track with the rhetoric, and that's what creates the incoherence that causes us problems around the world and at home. It also creates the sense that you can take him on with impunity."

Kenneth Adelman: "The most dispiriting and awful moment of the whole administration was the day that Bush gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to [former C.I.A. director] George Tenet, General Tommy Franks, and [Coalition Provisional Authority chief] Jerry [Paul] Bremer—three of the most incompetent people who've ever served in such key spots. And they get the highest civilian honor a president can bestow on anyone! That was the day I checked out of this administration.

The policy can be absolutely right, and noble, beneficial, but if you can't execute it, it's useless, just useless. I guess that's what I would have said: that Bush's arguments are absolutely right, but you know what, you just have to put them in the drawer marked can't do. And that's very different from let's go."

Eliot Cohen, director of the strategic-studies program at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and member of the Defense Policy Board: "I wouldn't be surprised if what we end up drifting toward is some sort of withdrawal on some sort of timetable and leaving the place in a pretty ghastly mess.… I do think it's going to end up encouraging various strands of Islamism, both Shia and Sunni, and probably will bring de-stabilization of some regimes of a more traditional kind, which already have their problems.… The best news is that the United States remains a healthy, vibrant, vigorous society. So in a real pinch, we can still pull ourselves together. Unfortunately, it will probably take another big hit. And a very different quality of leadership. Maybe we'll get it."

The other article worth reading in the same vein is:

Where Plan A left Ahmad Chalabi

By Dexter Filkins in the NYTimes Magazine (Here is one paragraph)

.

"The real culprit in all this is Wolfowitz," Chalabi says, referring to his erstwhile backer, the former deputy secretary of defense, Paul Wolfowitz. "They chickened out. The Pentagon guys chickened out." Chalabi still considers Wolfowitz a friend, so he proceeds carefully. America's big mistake, Chalabi maintains, was in failing to step out of the way after Hussein's downfall and let the Iraqis take charge. The Iraqis, not the Americans, should have been allowed to take over immediately – the people who knew the country, who spoke the language and, most important, who could take responsibility for the chaos that was unfolding in the streets. An Iraqi government could have acted harshly, even brutally, to regain control of the place, and the Iraqis would have been without a foreigner to blame. They would have appreciated the firm hand. There would have been no guerrilla insurgency or, if there was, a small one that the new Iraqi government could have ferreted out and crushed on its own. An Iraqi leadership would have brought Moktada al-Sadr, the populist cleric, into the government and house-trained him. The Americans, in all likelihood, could have gone home. They certainly would have been home by now.

.

"We would have taken hold of the country," Chalabi says. "We would have revitalized the civil service immediately. We would have been able to put together a military force and an intelligence service. There would have been no insurgency. We would have had electricity. The Americans screwed it up."
.
"We would have taken hold of the country," Chalabi says. "We would have revitalized the civil service immediately. We would have been able to put together a military force and an intelligence service. There would have been no insurgency. We would have had electricity. The Americans screwed it up."

Landis: Iraq War Sapping U.S. Influence in Lebanon

November 3, 2006

Taken Question Question
Office of the Spokesman: US Department of State Press Releases
Nov. 3, 2006

Question: What is the U.S. policy on contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria?

Answer: We strongly advocate, in all countries, the right of all citizens to participate fully in political life and choose their leaders. We have met with several Syrian civil society organizations and representatives that promote much-needed peaceful democratic reform in their country. We have not met with members of the Muslim Brotherhood.  

Comment: The meeting between White House staff and Memebrs of the National Salvation Front did not include members of the Muslim Brotherhood and only followers of Khaddam's wing, one must presume.

Israeli Fighter Jets Stage Mock Raids over Beirut's Southern Suburbs. Israel signals that should the Shiites try to bring down the pro-American government with demonstrations, Israel is able to resume bombing of Lebanon.

.

Meanwhile Welch Criticizes Syria for Interfering in Lebanese Internal Affairs. Israel denies that the mock raids concentrated over Shiite areas are aimed at influencing Lebanon's domestic politics. An Israeli army document, backs up this claim. Entitled "Strategic diplomatic messages: the army must continue overflights to secure international pressure," it argues that overflights are aimed at pressuring the international community and not the Lebanese. The document was approved by chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz. Spain and the EU have ask Israel to stop the Lebanon overflights, because they are a violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which Solana said Israel had to respect like everyone else. Israel insists, "We will Continue Overflights Despite Protests." "They can protest for as long as they like," deputy defense minister Ephraim Sneh said.

.

Germans complained about two separate incidents, in which Israeli warplanes fired shots over a helicopter and an unarmed German vessel backing up the U.N. mission off the Lebanese coast.

Unexploded Israeli ordinance critically wounds principal of school in Baalbek and kills the busdriver who found it.

.

Hizbullah claims U.S. Using Lebanon to Wage War Against Syria, Iran. “In an interview with Hizbullah’s Al-Manar television, Nasrallah said it is a democratic right to demand the change of a government through “peaceful demonstrations.” “Those who are currently in the government demonstrated in the streets last year until they toppled the Cabinet of Premier Omar Karami,” he noted. “Why aren’t we allowed to do the same? If we demand this right, they call us rioters?”"

“Hezbollah is threatening street protests to force early elections in Lebanon if its demands are not met for a “national unity” Cabinet that would give the Islamic militants and their allies veto power over key decisions.” Amal Saad-Ghorayeb said the same in an interview on BBC World. She also pointed out that Hizbullah was not trying to take over the reigns of government, but just to get a “one third” blocking minority so that it would be able to veto cabinet decisions. (These quotes are thanks to t_desco, who copied them in the comment section)

Blair urges syria to help halt killing by insurgents in Iraq

David Stringer in the New Scotsman

Downing Street rejected suggestions the overture was part of an effort by the United States and Britain aimed at pressing Iraq's neighbours to assist with security duties, allowing coalition troops to withdraw.

"That is not part of the thinking," said Mr Blair's official spokesman. "We are very serious about revitalising the Midd

le East peace process, therefore it is the right thing to do to talk to all those who in some way have an influence. It is up to others to decide what role they play."

Dennis Ross, a former US Middle East envoy, also rejected suggestions the visit was part of a joint coalition strategy, saying it was "much more a British initiative, without the US".

He said holding the talks was a significant step, but cautioned against exaggerated hopes of a shift in relations between Syria and the West.

The obvious reason why one should not be high hoped is that Syria can only do so much to seal its border with Iraq. It is already doing a pretty good job according to US soldiers at the border. They are not so much worried about fighters getting across, but about money coming across. They claim Iraq already has plenty of arms. Here is a bit from a W. Post article on the border.

Along Iraq-Syria Border, a Struggle to Cover the Terrain 

By Josh White, Washington Post, Wednesday, November 1, 2006; Page A12

"If 10 donkeys can carry 66,000 packs of cigarettes, how much money can they carry?" said Capt. Paul Curry, 32, of Huntsville, Ala. Curry commands Apache Troop, 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment at a U.S. camp just a few feet from the official Rabiyah point of entry into Iraq. Border controls have improved, he said, but "we have no idea what we have missed so far. It's like looking for a needle in a haystack."

Iraqi officials who control the gateway say that as many as 2,000 people with Iraqi passports and as many as 500 foreigners pass into Iraq through Rabiyah each day, in addition to nearly 300 commercial trucks, 80 cars and as many as 30 buses.

As many as 2,000 Iraqis and 500 foreigners cross into Iraq from Syria each day at the Rabiyah border crossing. The zone is a centuries-old smuggling route. (Photos By Josh White — The Washington Post)

Raid Jamal, assistant manager of the border crossing, said that the border generates 3 billion Iraqi dinars each month — about $2 million — in customs duties and taxes but that the system has been mired in corruption for many years and needs to be cleaned up.

U.S. troops in the area are concerned that controls are too loose. For instance, the passport office is sparse and includes a single officer sitting at a desk behind a barred window where travelers line up to show their passports. The officer simply enters the information from each passport into a small ledger.

"The only thing he's really doing is nothing more than creating a historical log," said 1st Sgt. Richard DeLeon, 40, of Shafter, Calif., also a member of Apache Troop. "We can't scan your passport to find out if it's fake, we can't scan your photo. You can come in if you have a legitimate passport or a good fake. The weapons are already in Iraq. All you really need to do is bring money."

Lt. Col. Malcolm Frost, who commands 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, said the Rabiyah border entry needs shoring up. He cited plans to add high-tech passport technology, which would make it easier to identify foreign fighters, and a new, secure processing office in the next couple of months.

One of the few anti-smuggling measures the crossing already has is X-ray technology that scans trucks. It can detect trucks with false bottoms and compartments in which people and weapons can be hidden. On Monday, Frost watched as a truck was scanned and turned back for carrying used car parts, which are illegal to transport into Iraq and could be used to hide bomb parts.

"We're continually improving the ability to detect," Frost said. But the miles of earthen berm away from the crossing have proven difficult to monitor.

Tomlin, who trains border patrol officers, said that there are roughly 400 officers on his stretch of border and that they are getting steadily better at their jobs. They have new Chevrolet pickup trucks for patrolling and serviceable weapons. But he said they lack the infrastructure to support the equipment, and gasoline, food and electricity are hard for them to get.

He said he believes the units are about five months away from being able to operate as a competent border patrol. It could be years, however, before they can sustain themselves.

The British government recognizes that it doesn't have a lot to offer Syria and that Syria may feel that it doesn't want to offer the West very much either. Here is how the London Times quotes Downing Street on the subject.

As Downing Street accurately if somewhat lamely observed of this visit, “in the end the Syrian Government will decide what it believes is in Syria’s best interests”, and Mr Assad has so far appeared to relish being the bad boy on the Arab block.