Ya Libnan 11 Day Roundup – 6/30/09

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2009/06/friday_news_bri_53.php
Friday News Briefs
Published: Friday, 19 June, 2009 @ 9:22 AM in Beirut
Beirut – The top story today in Lebanon is the meeting between Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and Democratic Gathering parliamentary bloc leader and head of the Progressive Socialist party ( PSP) MP. Walid Jumblatt. The meeting took place overnight according to PSP sources.

They discussed the past problems and specifically the May 2008 violence and both praised the efforts of Talal Arslan during and after that period .

They also discussed the future prospects for Lebanon and the region, and stressed the need to work together to move Lebanon and the region from the crisis state to the state of cooperation for the sake of the people of Lebanon.

They also confirmed to continue to work together towards full reconciliation, and agreed to continue communication and consultation during the next phase.

As Safir newspaper said Friday that the agenda of the talks included the stage that followed the Doha agreement and the challenges that emerged after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest speech.

According to As Safir, the two officials were also to discuss prospects of dialogue between Jumblatt and Damascus, in addition to relations between Hezbollah and the Progressive Socialist Party.

The location of the meeting will of course remain a top secret since Nasrallah has been hiding ever since the 2006 war begun

Where is Soroush?

The likelihood of Khameini losing power or influence or even the advancing of a progressive step toward a change in the sharing of power in the “Islamic Republic of Iran” as a result of the 2009 post-Presidential Election Protests is virtually nil.  Khameini, on the otherhand, has pushed forward a more likely scenario – the rise of a Shia Imamate to replace the Ottoman Caliphate that broke apart during World War I and then found its terminus after the Turks and Greeks battled it out – a trail of blood that led to Ataturk’s decision to abolish the caliphate in 1923. 

The decision of Khameini to writeoff the opposition’s demands for a new vote and his refusal to even offer a vote discrepancy investigation has led to a remarkable climax of Moussavi momentum, highlighted by electric prod and baton wielding uniformed and plainclothesed riot control troops cracking heads and jailing dissidents on behalf of the present administration of Ahmadinejad and the concerned echelons of the Mullocracy.  The confirmed deaths of 17 “Mousavi Martyrs” now have a symbolic face in the beautiful young Nada, while unconfirmed twitter reports are detailing the excesses of the Khameini’s police, including seemingly outlandish and inconceivable reports that the crowd control efforts had degraded to wildly wielded axes and the maiming of entire swaths of protestors, has literally silenced the Western Media.  The lack of confirmable, first hand sources and footage has shut out the Western Televised world. 

69 people die in a Market explosion in Iraq, yesterday, and it is not a highline feature on 24 hour news networks…80 Taliban soldiers die in Pakistan’s tribal region of South Waziristan due to US predator strikes…where is the focus of the Media?  On the news they can accurately cover…the South Carolina Governor’s indiscretions.  Domestic political corruption and people magazine styled filler plagues nightly newscasts alongside human interest and environmental think pieces.   

More than anything, what this Khameini choice of omission has achieved is the submission of Western Media.  More powerful than any propaganda could ever be, the blackout of Journalists and dissident voices from the intellectual sphere of Iranian thinkers is better, in the long run, than disinformation which will later be proven false due to the existence of leads for Westerners to trace and debunk.  No, Khameini has learned the omnipotent power of omission to silence public activism abroad…this he has learned from North Korea and China. 

To prove this point, where is Soroush?

In 2006, both Time and Foreign Policy magazines listed Abdul Karim Soroush as a notable top ten influential world thinker.  Listed as a dissident reformer by these publications, his history is intimately interwoven with the creation of the Islamic Establishment during the Khomeini Revolution.  After falling out with the Establishment of the Wilayat al Faqih in the first decade of the Revolution, Soroush’s theories of knowledge led him to reject, in principle, the infallibility of the clerical elite in their interpretation and application of Shariah Law and the dictates of Muhammad in the political sphere. 

As early as 1995 and 1996, commentators like Robin Wright were suggesting that Soroush may be the Martin Luther that Islam has been waiting for in the much opined reformation of Islam into a moderate force for democracy and peace.  It would seem that this influential Iranian intellectual should be in the mix on the streets and speakhards of Tehran beneath the green banners of this Moussavi counter-cultural Revolution if indeed the infallibility of the Ayatollah is to be questioned in full and in a manner that resounds with the crowds of opposition Moussavi supporters. 

So, where is Soroush?  Moreover, why is it important, moreso now than ever, that we, in the West, are updated to his whereabouts? 

Losing the Buck

Since Obama took office, his policy of “Engagement” with the Muslim world has leaned toward the brink of submission through an ever widening circle of  dhimmipolitik thinkers.  The reason for this is due to his perception of the “right” war.  In the Obama frame, Iraq was the wrong war to fight and the goal is to extract American troops from the effort.  The Democrat Mantra of “no occupation” is a kneejerk position guided by far left peaceniks – the same peaceniks who were marching in the streets during the first Gulf War, chanting “No blood for Oil”.  Indeed, whenever the Iraq situation is brought up, one can’t help but note that for the entirety of the second Bush term the left wing of America and Europe published articles featuring the word “Occupation”, knowing that the Muslim World perceives any infidel presence in their lands as a crime against Allah if that infidel is not in complete submission to the aims and purposes of the Islamic Leadership.  Iraq may not have been the right war; however, it is instructive to consider the Obama line on the war being the “wrong war” in this “submission” based position.  Why is the Afghanistan campaign considered the “right” war to our young President?  It deserves analysis and consideration on the surface; however, the perception’s actual manifestations have ended in the new Iranian pickle. 

A Basij Mutiny?

Are we witnessing a Mutiny of the Basij in the Iranian Streets?

Generally, experts and writers on any topic strive to demonstrate their grasp of crisis situations and intend to bring order out of the chaos of geopolitical turmoil by relying on their years of research and study of the regional or local stage in question. However, in terms of grasping the situation in the Iranian Street, following the election of Ahmadinejad over Moussavi and the Ayatollah’s blessing of the Islamic Establishment’s deliberation on the populist vote’s legitimacy, what is important are the unknowns, particularly in relation to the Basij Militia.

In the Ayatollah Khameini’s Friday Sermon of June 19th, 2009, the Ayatollah scolded Basij elements who perpetrated heinous crimes against humanity in their assault on homes and barracks in the name of the Khomeini Revolution. In addition, Khameini chastised those who believe in the possibility that the Islamic Establishment of the Wilayat al Faqih could make an 11 million vote counting error, while dressing down reformers such as Khatemi and Rafsanjani, who hold the ability direct and incite masses of their supporters to the will of the agitating protestors. The children of Rafsanjani were also recognized in the invective and given sharp warning over their activities. The problem is, the Western World, slowly finding itself in solidarity with the “democracy” seekers whose blood is running in the streets of Iran, is blind to the realities of the struggle.

On the surface, the reason for the blindness is because of the media blackout imposed by the Islamic Establishment, which has summarily blocked Western Journalists from taking notes or shooting footage at the street level; which has singled out and targeted Western Journalists and rounded them up into prisons for the crime of curiosity and truthseeking; which has jailed dissenting editors, thinkers and writers of the Persian, Arabic, and Muslim stripes without regard for anything but the Will of the Khomeinist Elite; which has blocked visas for Western and outsider journalists, who seek to cover the story inside the auspices of the Iranian borders. This blindness gave rise to the cyber guerillas on YouTube, FaceBook and Twitter, who seek, no doubt at their own peril and for a multiplicity of agendas and reasons, to open the closed system of totalitarian dictatorship and pierce the veil of the Ayatollah’s stomp grounds.

NYT Misses the Barn on Khameini Speech

In his Friday Sermon, the Ayatollah Khameini probably used the word “Establishment” 200 times.  Did the New York Times catch on?  Nope.   Ayatollah Khameini’s Friday Prayer of 6/19/09 was probably his most watched speech, worldwide, since his ascension to the role of Guardian of the Jurist.   The Ayatollah constantly referred to his regime as the “Islamic Establishment” while solidifying his support of the “landslide” of Ahmadinejad’s victory and taking the opportunity to indirectly threaten Moussavi’s protesting supporters with bloodshed if they continue their agitations.  Khameini noted that all 4 presidential candidates were from within the Islamic Establishment, and went on to chide Western and Zionist attempts to frame the flap on Tehran’s streets as a fight between the Mullocracy and “outside forces” as a ludicrous stab.  Whatsmore – He is right!  The idea that Moussavi is a reformer is absurd, considering that when interviewed by Western reporters Moussavi claimed that he would not end the Iranian drive to Nuclear Power if he were elected.  The concept of Democracy and Dictatorship as on the table, in what Walid Phares has referred to as the Iranian “show”, according to Western idealists and even many of the youth agitating and aligning themselves against the current regime in the strikingly silent street marches which have already led to death and bloodshed on a small scale, is a false premise.  Western thinkers are comparing the situation on today’s Persian Streets to that faced by Reagan in which he sided with the Polish Street against the tyranny of its leadership decades ago.  This false comparison is striking.  Fox News’ conservo-catholics and pluralist advocates in the West like Ralph Peters are serving up President Obama’s silence on the issue as a tacit complicity and acceptance of Tyranny.   Sadly, the Western Pundits are far out of their depths in their reaction to the Iranian election and in their positions of solidarity with the anti-Ahmadenijad alliance.  In all reality, hope has clouded the minds of Reason in the West, who are observing the ruccus and grasping at any perceived signs of revolutionary regime shift in the despotic police state.   A letter from a Ministry within the Islamic Establishment that recently surfaced and claimed that Ahmadinejad came in 3rd in the election was waved off by the State Department as “too good to be true” as it began to focus on Twitter.com as an outlet for the cyber-guerillas itching for a world without Ahmadinejad.  The fact that journalists were rounded up and jailed in some quarters while free press visas were not renewed in others and landlines were blocked and the media was sidelined immediately placed the Western Journalistic world in a frame of reference to the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square, when considering the appearance of revolutionary student resolve in the streets of Tehran. 

The ironic thing about the Khameini speech; however, when considering these votaries of Chinese exemplars of a closed system, is the Ayatollah’s constant use of the word “Establishment” to refer to the Islamic government of the Wilayat al Faqih.  The Western refusal to accept that Democracy played no part in this “Vote” which may or may not have expressed “the will of the people” is the ultimate in delusion.  A similar irony exists in the June 7th parliamentary elections in Lebanon in which the Western and Arab worlds dodged the bullet of Hezbollah taking a majority akin to the “democratic” victory of Hamas in Gaza back in 2006.   In neither case was democracy in play.  In Lebanon, the current confessional system of “democracy” focuses the vote on a system structured around the politicization of Religious entitlement in which party lines and alliances are drawn on Religious affiliation.  In Iran, the Ayatollah handpicked the contenders for the office of the President.  In neither case did the will of the people factor into the final equation.  In Lebanon, the majority of the people are Shia, and the triumph of the March 14 “Arab” Alliance over the encroachment of the March 8 opposition forces of the Shia-Syrian-Iranian coalition was a case of bated breath in a land in which the last census took place 77 years ago.  What would the US federalist districts and representative realities look like if the US had not taken a Census since the Great Depression?  What opportunity did Iranians outside of the Religious Establishment of the Shia paradigm have in running for the office of the Presidency?  Zero!  So, in retrospect, both the Lebanese and Iranian models of the election system are frought with the Establishment of Religion as the guiding light of the consent of the governed. 

It is striking that the United States republic of individual liberty has, in its Constitution, an “Establishment Clause” which does not allow for Religious affiliation to influence the reins of Power at the legal level as a defense against the Tyranny of dogmatic justice creeds such as Shariah Law; yet, no Western intellectuals have deemed it worth while to note that the Iranian Religious Leader’s Friday rallying call against the protestors focused on the “Islamic Establishment” as the legal framework for the consent of the governed in the Persian power.   In all reality, the Western Intellectual world is so drunk with the ideals of equality, pluralism and democracy to the point that the best and brightest are no longer able to differentiate the writ of Democracy and Populist balderdash.   

Laughably, the situation in both Lebanon and Iran is akin to the staggering and drunk, broken down Lee Marvin, literally falling off the wagon and drawing down on and almost impossibly missing the barn in the Western classic “Cat Ballou”.  The idealized dime store novel depictions of Kid Shaleen didn’t muster with the real thing at first blush in the romantic depiction of a gun slinger in the street. 

Democracy, drunk with the Establishment of Religion, misses the barn of individual liberty every time.  The straight shot of Justice in the world of democratic elections and political power has nothing to do with Religious Righteousness; to base the consent of the governed on the Islamic Establishment in the Middle East is an exercise in justifying religious populism.  The tyranny of Allah, the tyranny of Hezbollah, the tyranny of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the tyranny of kings and dictators in the Muslim World do not provide any measure of justice; rather, they guarantee the imposition of Shariah Law and the rise of extremist fringe elements, supremacist mass murderers and the slavery of women.   Life, liberty, happiness, property, and justice do not, cannot, and will never, reasonably exist in the Middle East so long as the constitutions of the Arabic, Persian, and Muslim majority nations do not harbor the same establishment clause found in the US Constitution as a check on the Tyranny of Shariah Law…as a proclamation of Religious and Political Freedom.  In any governance beyond the mosque anywhere in the world, the Islamic Establishment of economic and ethical power is based on the collective rights of the Umma as the source of Justice – the possibilities of reason, innovation, and individual liberty as the hallmarks of power were destroyed 1100 years ago when the gates of ijtihad closed.  Justice is a house built upon individual liberty.  Justification is a house built upon the will of the collective.   Until this reality is recognized, democracy advocates will drunkenly miss the barn.

Gary H. Johnson, Jr. (6/19/09, 4:20pmEST)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/20/world/middleeast/20iran.html?ref=middleeast

Iran’s Ruling Cleric Warns of Bloodshed if Protests Persist
By NAZILA FATHI and ALAN COWELL
Published: June 19, 2009

Ya Libnan 12 day Roundup – 6/18/09

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2009/06/sunday_news_bri_51.php
Sunday News Briefs – Elections 2009
Published: Sunday, 7 June, 2009 @ 8:03 AM in Beirut
Beirut: Sunday June 7, 2009 election will determine the future of Lebanon and the pressure will be mainly on the divided Christians communities to decide what kind of Lebanon they really want. There is a huge concern that Lebanon could lose its identity if the Iranian and Syrian backed March 8 wins the election.

The irony of this election is that several of the present candidates had their immediate relatives reportedly killed by the Syrians who are the closest allies of the March 8 Hezbollah-led coalition:

Nadim Gemayel’s father, former president Bashir Gemayel was assassinated on Sept. 14, 1982

Sami Gemayel’s brother Pierre, who was Lebanon’s industry minister was assassinated on November 21, 2006 . Sami is Nadim’s cousin

Michel Mouawad’s father former president Rene Mouawad was assassinated on November 22, 1989

Nayla Tueni’s father former MP and al Nahar chief Gebran Tueni was assassinated on December 12, 2005

Walid Jumblatt’s father, Kamal Jumblatt , founder of the Progressive Socialist Party was assassinated on March 16, 1977

Saad Hariri’s father , Rafik Hariri , former Prime Minister of Lebanon was assassinated on February 14, 2005

Lebanon’s Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir sounded an alarm Sunday when he said ” Lebanon is facing a threat to entity and Arab identity”.

He called on all Lebanese to pay attention to such dangers and to “adopt courageous stances that would further establish our Lebanese identity and maintain Lebanon as a free country filled with moral virtues, full sovereignty and achieved independence.” He added : “We must work hard on thwarting all attempts that if successful could change the face of Lebanon.”

Sfeir is aware of the danger that even though the Christians are no longer the majority, the fact they are divided will decide who will win or lose the election and he doesn’t want the Christians to be blamed for handing out the country to the Iranians.

The question is: Will the Christians listen to Sfeir , their spiritual leader who has been called the “conscious of Lebanon”

Or will they listen to General Aoun who has aligned himself with the Iranian and Syrian- backed Hezbollah group with the hope of becoming the next president when he is 80 ? Aoun himself was defeated by the Syrian army in October 1990 and forced into exile. Aoun returned to Lebanon after the Cedar revolution led by March 14 alliance forced Syria out of Lebanon.

There is a huge concern that a Hezbollah victory could spell the end of the Lebanese identity and could turn Lebanon into another Gaza

The other big concern is that Hezbollah , who has been calling for a regime change could turn Lebanon into a Welayat-el Faqih (guardianship of the Islamic Jurists) type state similar to Iran and in such a case Lebanon will completely lose its identity.

When the Lebanese wake up on Monday they will be able to figure out what kind of face Lebanon will have and at that point it will be too late to change their mind. The time to decide the future is now!!!

Ya Libnan 2 Week Roundup – 6/6/09

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2009/05/saturday_news_b_44.php

Saturday News Briefs
Published: Saturday, 23 May, 2009 @ 7:30 PM in Beirut
Beirut- Speaker Nabih Berri delivered an election campaign speech full of promises today in Baalbeck and tried to present the opposition as a moderate force that only wants the best for Lebanon. In his speech he insisted that the opposition is not power hungry and wants if successful in the upcoming elections to form a national unity government

Berri tried to reassure March 14 supporters and all the Lebanese people that the arms of the resistance will only be used against the Israeli enemy. But Berri did not explain how he can make such a promise, since the arms are not his and are in Hezbollah’s full control. Hezbollah after all used its arms when it occupied West Beirut on May 7, 2008 and its attacks against the Druze strongholds in Mt Lebanon.

Berri also said ” In the name of the opposition, without exception, we want the state, we want the Lebanese state but we don’t want power. We want the full implementation of the Taef accord. We want the court and the truth. We want to know who attempted to kill Lebanon with Hariri’s murder.
But according to observers the opposition always fought the Hariri tribunal and always criticized the Taef accord and always undermined the state. The mass resignation of all the Hezbollah and Amal ministers and the occupation of downtown Beirut are a clear example of undermining the state.

FP 2009 Update – Week 18 – The Cable

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/

Beef tenderloin and failing states: it’s what’s for dinner
Wed, 05/06/2009 – 4:25pm
Vice President Joseph Biden is hosting the presidential delegations from Afghanistan and Pakistan for dinner tonight at his Naval Observatory residence. Among the guests are several members of the Senate and House foreign affairs committees (as well as Rep. Nita Lowey, the chair of the House appropriations state foreign ops subcommittee) that hold the purse strings on bills outlining some $1.5 billion in proposed military and civilian assistance to Pakistan that the administration would like to get out the door.

Pool reporter Carol Lee of Politico tallies the full guest list:

From the Afghanistan delegation:
   •  His Excellency Hamid Karzai President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Said Tayeb Jawad Ambassador of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Rangin Dadfar Spanta Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency General Abdul Rahim Wardak Minister of Defense of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Haneef Atmar Minister of Interior of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Dr. Zalmay Rassoul National Security Advisor of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Dr. Omar Zakhilwal Minister of Finance of Afghanistan
   •  His Excellency Wahidullah Shahrani Minister of Commerce and Industry
   •  His Excellency Asif Rahimi Minister of Agriculture
   •  His Excellency Amrullah Saleh Director General of National Directorate of Security (Director of National Intelligence)
   •  Mr. Homayun Hamidzada Spokesperson, Office of the President

From the Pakistan delegation:

   •  His Excellency Asif Ali Zardari President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
   •  His Excellency Bilawal Bhutto Zardari Chairman of the Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarians
   •  His Excellency Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi Minister of Foreign Affairs
   •  His Excellency Husain Haqqani Ambassador to the United States
   •  His Excellency Nazar Muhammad Gondal Minister for Food and Agriculture
   •  Mr. A. Rehman Malik Interior Minister
   •  Mr. Qamar-uz-Zaman Kaira Minister of Information
   •  Mr. Salman Faruqui Secretary General
   •  Mr. Shaukat Fayaz Ahmed Tarin Finance Advisor
   •  Lt. General Ahmed Shuja Pasha Director General
   •  Brig. Mian Muhammad Hilal Hussain Military Secretary to the President
   •  Mrs. Ispahani, Spokesperson

The Guests:

   •  The Honorable Howard L. Berman, Representative (D-CA), HFAC Chairman
   •  Mr. James A. Bever, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Asia and the Near East, United States Agency for International Development
   •  Antony Blinken, Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President
   •  Donald A. Camp, Senior Director for South Asia,  National Security Council
   •  The Honorable Karl Eikenberry, American Ambassador to Afghanistan
   •  The Honorable Michele Flournoy, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
   •  Mr. Alonzo L. Fulgham, Acting Administrator, United States Agency for International Development

FP 2009 Update – Week 17 – The Cable

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/

Clinton articulates policy regarding Hamas
Wed, 04/29/2009 – 11:43am
In an interview with Fox News’ James Rosen conducted in Baghdad Saturday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated the administration’s policy regarding Hamas:

MR. ROSEN: Without getting hung up on the name that is attached to it, do you and President Obama subscribe to the Bush doctrine, by which I mean, roughly speaking, for the purpose of our conversation, the view that if you harbor, clothe, feed, or otherwise materially aid a terrorist, then you, yourself, are a terrorist? Is that a doctrine to which you and President Obama subscribe?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, as you’ve heard from us in the last nearly 100 days we will not deal with Hamas unless they renounce violence, recognize Israel, and agree to abide by prior Palestinian Authority agreements. We do not in any way support the kind of extremists that you see. What we are looking for is to separate out those who are, as we found in Iraq, part of an armed campaign for political reasons that can be reconcilable.

We began to turn Iraq around, as you remember, under President Bush, even with that doctrine, when the military began to work with groups of people, particularly the so-called Sons of Iraq, and The Awakening, who, months before, had taken up arms against Americans and other Iraqis. And the thinking was, we need to separate out those who are there for reasons having to do with their own political and cultural and historic ties, as opposed to the hard core extremists and terrorists.