Europe’s Islamist threats

The exact reach of Islamist extremism in Europe is difficult to identify, but the terror threat — including nuclear terrorism — is real, warns a report from the Brussels-based European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center.

Is Syria leaving Lebanon?

Syria’s long occupation of Lebanon ended Tuesday with a cocktail party frorm the Lebanese who can turn even war and military occupation into a social event.

The Baghdad mantra

Chances aare if you keep repeating something long enough one of two things are likely to happen. First, you eventually start believing your own mantra, and second, in the long run the odds are that your predictions will come about.

Lebanon’s renewed hope

Lebanon has a new government — and with it, new hope.

Leaving Gaza is hard to do

Israel is beginning to realize that leaving the Gaza Strip is going to be harder than it was occupying it.

Chirac: AUx urnes, citoyens

“La Marseillaise,” the French national anthem calls on France’s citizens to arms — “aux armes, citoyens.” French President Jacques Chirac, while promoting the “yes” vote for Europe’s constitution, might have used a similar line calling “aux urnes, citoyens;” to the ballot boxes, citizens.

Terror threat averted

Authorities in the U.S. this week indicted three Britons of South Asian origin for plotting an attack on financial institutions in Washington, New York and New Jersey. Last August, United Press International revealed details of the plot federal prosecutors outlined this week after the three men’s arrest by British authorities.

Politics & Policies: Lebanon fears ‘events’

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 4/13/2005 8:33 AM

WASHINGTON, April 13 (UPI) — Thirty years ago this Wednesday was the official start of the Lebanese civil war. Fears of the conflict re-igniting have recently surfaced following the Feb. 14 assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri and the turmoil that ensued.

“Lebanon’s political class, notoriously fractured, could create fresh opportunities for outside interference and pave the way for domestic chaos,” warns a report issued Tuesday by the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think tank.

The war destroyed large parts of the country, killed close to 150,000 people, forced thousands to flee and culminated with foreign occupations.

The 1989 Saudi-sponsored Taif Peace Accord — which was never fully implemented — eventually ended the conflict, and the country enjoyed a decade or so of prosperity. But in reality, much as the official debut of the war occurred sometime before April 13, 1975, so too the official end to the conflict remains unclear.

One of the dangers looming over Lebanon is that there was never really a resolution to the conflict. After years of fierce hostilities, it seemed as though the warring factions grew tired of fighting and the war sputtered and stopped, much like a car running out of gas. The causes behind the conflict were never addressed, and there was no attempt at reconciliation.

Not one monument was erected to the memory of the 150,000 casualties of the war, nor has there been any real effort to uncover what became of the 17,000 people who were kidnapped and remain missing. It’s almost as though the country is in collective denial over the years of conflict.

Most Lebanese usually refer to the war as simply “the events.”

Today the risk of more “events” is very real. In a report titled “Syria After Lebanon, Lebanon After Syria,” the International Crisis Group stresses that “the Syrian regime, sensing its survival at stake, may lash out, using its remaining instruments and allies in Lebanon and beyond.”

The threat to Lebanon’s security is not purely external; there are ample dangers within. In a “country awash with weapons and on the verge of a major redistribution of power and resources, the means and motivations for violence abound,” Reinoud Leenders, an analyst with the ICG points out.

There is also the danger, according to the ICG, that “the U.S., feeling its broader regional goals within striking distance, may well over-reach, triggering violent reactions from Syria, Hezbollah or militant Palestinian groups.”

The Syrians worry that the Bush administration may attempt to push forward with its vision of regime change. Reacting to pressures from the Lebanese, the United States and the international community, Damascus began withdrawing its forces from Lebanon, where Syrian troops intervened in 1976 to stop the civil war.

Since the Syrians began their pullout, a number of bombs have exploded in Christian areas of Beirut; the obvious intention to spark dissent. But the Lebanese have been wise, so far.

“Most international and Lebanese actors have acted with welcome wisdom,” reports the ICG. Marwan Hamade, a prominent opposition leader and former Cabinet minister in Hariri’s government, told United Press International that recent events are not likely to re-ignite the Lebanese civil war.

Hamade, himself the target of an assassination attempt, told UPI “the ingredients for civil war are not there.” The former minister said he feels this time things are very different and that “the Lebanese people are far more conscious of the situation. “There are neither the ingredients nor the seeds for a civil war,” said Hamade. “Civil war is not at the door.”

One of the factors working in Lebanon’s favor has been the initiative shown by the Lebanese opposition in working together across sectarian and political divides, stressing national unity.

The assassination of Hariri — which Yasser Accoui, editor-in-chief of Beirut’s Executive magazine equated to nothing short of “a coup d’etat” — resulted in an unexpected popular uprising demanding the withdrawal of Syria.

Syria acquiesced and began to pull out. However, as the ICG report points out, what Syria leaves behind remains uncertain.

In a country “accustomed to being a theater for proxy wars between Arabs, Palestinian and Israelis,” the report states, “the means and motivations for violence abound.”

For Lebanon to enjoy continued serenity and avoid falling back into civil strife, the Brussels group said it “will require the U.S. to curb its appetite, Lebanon’s opposition to maintain its moderation, and Syria to avoid a scorched-earth policy.

ICG recommends a sundry list of steps be taken by Lebanon, the United States, the European Union, Syria, Israel and the United Nations.

It suggests Lebanese political forces, including the opposition and Hezbollah, adopt a joint platform to form an interim government to organize elections, pass a new electoral law, address unimplemented aspects of the Taif Accord and Security Council Resolution 1559.

It recommends that Lebanon take Syrian concerns into account while shaping policies toward Israel, conduct relations with Syria on the basis of equality between sovereign states, and prosecute persons found responsible for Hariri’s assassination by the U.N. investigation.

It counsels the gradual integration of Hezbollah’s military wing as an autonomous unit under Lebanese army control and the full disarmament of Hezbollah in the context of progress toward Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Syrian peace agreements.

The full report can be seen on crisisgroup.org.

–

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Israel’s unsettlement policy

BY CLAUDE SALHANI
KHALEEJ TIMES

13 April 2005

AS ISRAEL prepares to evacuate the Gaza Strip and four West Bank settlements in the coming months, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon faces strong opposition at home, including threats of terror by Jewish extremists aiming to disrupt the evacuation.

Sharon was hoping his meeting with President Bush at the president’s ranch in Crawford, Texas on Monday, would give him additional political support. Instead, Bush talked tough strongly cautioning the Israeli prime minister against any settlement expansions.

“I told the prime minister not to undertake any activity that contravenes the Road Map or prejudices final status obligations,” Bush told Sharon, reminding the Israeli prime minister that the Middle East road map calls for Israel to remove unauthorised settlements in the Palestinian territories.

The road map prohibits the creation of any new settlements as well as the expansion of existing ones including on the grounds of “natural growth.”

Sharon assured Bush: “I will fulfil my commitment to you, Mr President, to remove unauthorised outposts. As to settlements, Israel will meet all its obligations under the road map.”

But plans for expanding the West Bank settlement of Maaleh Adumim by some 3,500 apartments, which would link it with Jerusalem are likely to proceed, despite international criticism. Sharon sees this move as extending a carrot to those opposed to evacuating Gaza.

But if Israel was to proceed with the development, known as E-1, it could seriously affect the future of the peace process. Additionally, there are also real fears of potential terrorist attacks by Jewish extremists on the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in the occupied Jerusalem in order to disrupt the withdrawal.

Such attack would have a devastating effect on the peace process, setting it back and reviving the risk of all-out violence. An attack on the Muslim holy sites could trigger a Third Intifada, one that would be far bloodier and more harmful to all sides in the conflict. There would be no winners in the next round of Israeli-Palestinian violence.

Already, Palestinian resistance groups have threatened to end the ceasefire with Israel if Al-Aqsa Mosque — Islam’s third holiest Mosque — is attacked.

Indeed, the forced removal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip is likely to test the Jewish state’s strength, resolve and unity as opponents of evacuating the occupied Palestinian territory are not about to make this an easy choice for Prime Minister Sharon’s government.

Several rabbis, right-wing groups and settlers are calling on Israeli security forces to refuse orders asking them to evict the settlers.

The Union of Rabbis for the People of Israel and the Land of Israel issued a statement last week asking “Tens of thousands of people to prepare” for a call up “to be with our brethren,” in support of the settlers in Gaza who refuse to leave.

“It will not be easy,” said Ehud Olmert, Israel’s deputy prime minister during a telephone conference last week, referring to the planned pullout. “It will be difficult,” said Olmert, “it will be heartbreaking.” In fact, what was not easy was maintaining and securing those settlements to begin with. Several thousands of Israeli soldiers were required to ensure the security of about 7,500 settlers.

Israel now plans to begin evacuating the Strip on July 20. The risk of violence from those opposed to the evacuation plan exists, said Olmert. “The danger is there. We hope it will be prevented.”

“One must not help evacuate settlements in the land of Israel and give them to foreigners. This contradicts the Halacha (Jewish law), the Torah, ethics, and God forbid, one must not be partner to a transgression,” declared former Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Avraham Shapiro last week.

Olmert’s response is that “Gaza was never part of historic Israel. “I don’t remember that Gaza was part of Israel. I don’t remember praying for Gaza,” said Olmert. Olmert, who spoke prior to Sharon’s visit to the US, said giving up the settlements was a necessity to achieve peace with the Palestinians. “We trust the good will of Abu Mazen,” said Olmert, referring to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas by his more familiar name. “He (Abbas) wants to make peace. There is no reason to doubt him.”

Olmert admits that the Sharon government is taking a political gamble in applying such controversial policies as the withdrawal. “We have stuck our necks out politically, now is the time for the Palestinians to take risks,” said Olmert.

But the risk the Palestinians fear most is that the Israeli evacuation from Gaza will not lead “Gaza First,” but “Gaza only,” and to a dead end in the Middle East Road Map.

In any case, Abu Mazen is sure to have his work cut out for him when he visits the US to meet with Bush possibly during the third week in April, according to sources in the Palestinian Authority.

Claude Salhani is International Editor and a political analyst with United Press International in Washington

Politics & Policies: Settlements unsettlement

Published 4/11/2005 9:00 AM

WASHINGTON, April 11 (UPI) — Israel’s forthcoming withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is likely to test the Jewish state’s strength, resolve and unity as proponents and opponents of evacuating the occupied Palestinian territory are bound to clash — in some instances quite literally.

A number of rabbis, right-wing groups and settlers are calling on Israeli soldiers and police to dissent, and to refuse orders that come down the chain of command, asking them to forcefully evict Jewish settlers from Gaza and four West Bank settlements.

The Union of Rabbis for the People of Israel and the Land of Israel issued a statement last week asking “Tens of thousands of people to prepare” for a call “to be with our brethren” in support of the settlers in Gaza who refuse to leave.

The issue of settlements will likely be among the topics Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will discuss with President George W. Bush when the two leaders meet at the president’s Texas ranch, Monday, during the prime minister’s six-hour stopover. An Israeli diplomat told United Press International that Bush and Sharon will discuss “the disengagement process and security concerns.”

Among the president’s concerns is Israel’s E-1 plan to add about 3,500 apartments to Ma’aleh Adumim, connecting it with Jerusalem, a plan that was harshly criticized by the Bush administration.

However, in recent days new concerns arose. There are fears of a potential terrorist attack by Jewish extremists on the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in order to disrupt the withdrawal. Any such attack would set the peace process back, reviving the risk of all-out violence and re-fueling the intifada. Palestinian resistance groups have threatened to end the cease-fire with Israel if the mosque — Islam’s third-holiest site — is attacked.

“If Zionist extremists carry out their threats of invading Al-Aqsa mosque, it will enflame the region and end the truce,” the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, a militant Palestinian group, said in a statement. The group has in the past claimed responsibility for a number of terrorist attacks in Israel.

“Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa mosque are a red line that no Zionist should be able to cross,” the group warned.

Israel, which captured Gaza from Egypt during the June 1967 Six-Day War, plans to begin evacuating the Strip on July 20. About 7,500 Israeli settlers have made their home in the 225-square-mile territory — an area slightly more than twice the size of Washington, D.C. — and where about 1.3 million Palestinians live, a majority of them in poverty.

“It will not be easy,” said Ehud Olmert, Israel’s deputy prime minister during a telephone conference last week, referring to the planned pullout. “It will be difficult,” said Olmert, “it will be heartbreaking.”

Indeed, it was not easy maintaining those settlements in the first place, where thousands of Israeli soldiers were needed to ensure the security of the Gaza settlers.

The risk of violence emanating from settlers, and their supporters, wishing to resist the evacuation exists, said Olmert. “The danger is there. We hope it will be prevented.”

“One must not help evacuate settlements in the Land of Israel and give them to foreigners,” declared former Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Avraham Shapiro last week. “This contradicts the Halacha (Jewish law), the Torah, ethics, and God forbid, one must not be partner to a transgression.”

Olmert’s reply to those who argue that Israel is “giving part of the Land of Israel away,” is that “Gaza was the base of aggression against Israel, and was never part of historic Israel. I don’t remember that Gaza was part of Israel. I don’t remember praying for Gaza,” said Olmert.

“Even Moses took the long way to the Promised Land by avoiding going through Gaza when he guided the Jews out of Egypt,” said one analyst.

Olmert, who spoke a few days before Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s visit to the United States, said that giving up the settlements was a necessity to achieve peace with the Palestinians. Olmert said he had “trust (in) the good will of Abu Mazen,” referring to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas by his more familiar name.

“He is certainly different from Yasser Arafat,” said the Israeli politician. “He (Abbas) wants to make peace. There is no reason to doubt him.”

Not everyone in Israel agrees, or trusts, Abu Mazen as much. Olmert concedes that the Sharon government is taking a political gamble in applying such controversial policies as the withdrawal. “We have stuck our necks out politically; now is the time for the Palestinians to take risks,” said Olmert.

Mahmoud Abbas is due to visit the United States possibly during the third week in April to meet with President Bush, according to a PA source. The Bush administration had in the past refused to meet with Abbas’ predecessor, Arafat, accusing him of being tainted by, and supportive of terrorism. Abbas will come to Washington with a clean slate, but will leave with heavy baggage.

Olmert said he believed Abu Mazen would be forced, in the near future, to confront the “terrorist organizations.” That is one issue President Bush will most likely raise with Abu Mazen when they meet.

–

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International