Mitchell

‘Talk of resuming Syria talks premature’
JPost

Talk of a resumption of Israeli-Syrian peace negotiations is “very premature considering Syrian intransigence and support for terror,” Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon told The Jerusalem Post.

Speculation was rampant in Israel after the arrival of American diplomat and Syria expert Frederick Hoff, a top advisor to American Middle East envoy George Mitchell…. Ayalon denied outright Israeli media reports that Hoff is bringing with him an early draft of an American plan for an Israel-Syria compromise on the Golan Heights.

Frederick Hoff

Shimon Shiffer in Yedioth Ahronoth: (Via “friday-lunch-club”)

“The American administration has decided to discreetly examine ways to resume negotiations between Israel and Syria.

It was learned last night that senior American diplomat Fred Hoff, a member of the team of special US envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell, will meet today with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and top officials in the political and security echelon. The goal is to examine the possibility of resuming the talks between Israel and Syria, closely accompanied by the US.

Hoff will continue from here to Damascus, to talks with Syrian President Bashar Assad and with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem. As of now, the Israeli side is sticking to the position whereby the talks with Syria can resume, but without preconditions. According to this position, the Syrians will be able to demand the return of the Golan Heights, while Israel will make it clear that it demands to remain on the Golan Heights in any arrangement.

That said, the Israeli intelligence community advocates resuming the negotiations with Syria and an agreement that entails the return of the Golan Heights with it being demilitarized on both sides of the border, in return for Damascus cutting its alliance with Iran.

Orly Azulai of Yedioth Ahronoth reports that Fred Hoff has already written a proposal for an Israeli-Syrian agreement:

The American administration has already begun to draw up a plan for a peace agreement between Israel and Syria. It is based on a detailed document written by Dr. Fred Hoff, a member of George Mitchell’s team, who will arrive today for talks in Israel.

Hoff recently completed writing the document that forms the initial draft for a peace agreement between Israel and Syria. Mitchell adopted this document as the basis for the peace between Israel and Syria.

The document suggests solutions to the complicated problems that are the bone of contention between Israel and Syria, and even suggests a route for the border line between the two countries that the American administration is already calling the “Hoff line.” Hoff suggests that the peace process between Israel and Syria take place in two stages: in the first stage the sides would build trust by sharing parks, nature reserves and water sources on the Golan Heights. He says that this way the two peoples will learn to live together and could bring down the walls of suspicion. In the second stage, he proposes, Israel would withdraw from the Golan to the line that he suggests.

He does not say how much time should elapse between the normalizationagreement and shared use of these reserves to the beginning of the withdrawal. However, based on sources close to Mitchell, this would be aprocess that would last for several years. Hoff’s proposal provides for a solution in which there are only winners for a problem that for years was considered a zero sum dynamic, says Scott Lasensky.”

Water for Peace
By STANLEY A. WEISS
July 13, 2009,
Op-Ed Contributor, NY Times

LONDON — Just days after the death of his father, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was asked to rank the issues of dispute between Syria and Israel. “Israel ranks her priorities in the following way: security, land and water,” he said. “But the truth is different. They consider water to be the most important.” He added, “Discussing this matter now is premature and its turn will come only after the land issue is discussed.”

Nine years later, the land issue remains frozen. The issue of water, however, has taken a dire turn. After a five-year drought, the region is headed toward a water calamity that could overwhelm all efforts at peace.

The Jordan River now has large sections reduced to a trickle. The Sea of Galilee is at its lowest point ever. The surface area of the Dead Sea has shrunk by a third. Iraq’s ancient marshes are now marked by large swaths of stalks and caked mud.

In northern Syria, more than 160 villages the past two years have run dry and been deserted by residents. In Gaza, 150,000 Palestinians have no access to tap water. In Israel, the pumps at the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret), its largest reservoir, were exposed above the water level, rendering pumping impossible. In Lebanon, 70 percent of wastewater is dumped into cesspools, polluting groundwater; Jordan is struggling with just 10 percent of its average rainfall.

Little wonder that many warn that future wars will be fought over water, not land.

But can crisis be turned into opportunity? Could water, rather than land, be the way to cooperation and peace in the Middle East?

“We are great believers in the water issue as a catalyst for regional peace,” says Gilead Sher, Israel’s chief negotiator at the Camp David summit and the Taba peace talks in 1999-2001. “In all previous rounds of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the water section has been very close to concluding between the sides within the agreement framework.”

Others, like Jordanian Munqeth Mehyar, Palestinian Nader Al-Khateeb, and Israeli Gidon Bromberg, believe water provides new avenues for dialogue. Together, the three run EcoPeace, an organization that brings together Jordanian, Palestinian and Israeli environmentalists to promote sustainable development and build “Good Water Neighbors” in the Middle East.

Syria itself is also taking a leadership role. Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Naji Otri met recently with Iraqi Minister of Electricity Wahid Kareem in Damascus to discuss water resources. This came on the heels of a recent meeting in Baghdad of the energy ministers of Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria to discuss energy and security, which led to talk of a regional compact — a “new Baghdad Pact, without the U.S.,” as Zaab Sethna calls it. Sethna, co-founder of Northern Gulf Partners, working to bring investment to Baghdad, adds: “Water would be a natural area for cooperation.”

It is time to make peace on behalf of water.

First, the U.S. should work with Turkey, Israel, Lebanon and Syria to convene a conference — in Istanbul. “The best way to resolve the water shortage is to bring water from super-abundant sources in the north — that is, Turkey,” says the Israeli scholar Bernard Avishai.

The carrier would have to run through Syria and possibly Lebanon. Turkey has offered to lead such efforts in the past — most recently proposing a “water plan for peace,” using water from the Manavgat River to aid its neighbors.

Second, the United States must persuade Israel to share its water expertise and technology with its Arab neighbors. Water, rather than land, could form the basis of an agreement between Israel and Syria, revolving in part around the disputed Golan Heights, the source of more than 55 percent of Israel’s fresh water.

The U.S. should also broker a new agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority to replace the failed Joint Water Committee. The agreement should make each side a partner in both supply and management. Without it, Gaza will run dry, and pollution from the Strip will continue to threaten Israeli water reserves.

Third, the U.N. should mobilize a global effort to find cheaper, more environmentally friendly ways to convert seawater into drinking water. While widely practiced in Israel and Gulf states, desalination costs three times what it costs to tap traditional sources, and can use 10 times the energy. At its climate change conference in Copenhagen this December, the U.N. should launch a campaign to build public-private partnerships to turn the promise of desalination into a more tenable solution.

It has been said that if Israel were on fire, its Arab neighbors would not supply the water to put the fire out — and vice-versa. But when it comes to water, every nation is in the same boat.

Stanley A. Weiss is the founding chairman of Business Executives for National Security.

Iraq lashed by sandstorms and battling drought
The Associated Press

BAGHDAD (AP) — Below-average rainfall and insufficient water in the Euphrates and Tigris rivers have left Iraq bone dry for a second straight year, wrecking swaths of farm land, threatening drinking water supplies and intensifying fierce sandstorms that have coated the country in brown dust.

The drought has dealt a harsh blow to hopes that reductions in sectarian violence over the last year would fuel an economic recovery. Instead, the government’s budget suffered a double-hit: Lower than expected oil prices have crimped revenues and the scarcity of water will force Iraq to spend money to import most of the crops, especially wheat and rice, to meet domestic demand.

“Look at this land. There is no water,” said Ashur Mohamed Ahmood, slipping the tip of his black cane into deep cracks in his parched field. He cautioned children not to run, fearing their small bare feet would get stuck in the crevices crisscrossing the farm on the outskirts of Baghdad.

“Without water there are no plants. This is the plant,” he says, uprooting a weed and throwing it back to the ground…..

Malek Jandali
Echoes from Ugarit (Soul b Music, June 2009)
$12.99 (CD)/$9.99 (mp3)
Available at: cdbaby.com/cd/malekjandali

Much like his beloved Syria itself, Syrian pianist and composer Malek Jandali’s debut album Echoes from Ugarit cradles a splendid fusion of styles and traditions from across cultures and time.

This cosmopolitan ethos becomes Jandali’s signature compositional mark that unites the diverse eight tracks on the album recorded with conductor Sergey Kondrashev leading the Russian Philharmonic Orchestra. In each piece, East meets West, sometimes explicitly, sometimes subtly; but often, where one ends and the other begins becomes irrelevant. Instead the music’s structural integrity is preserved by the interdependence of its melodic, rhythmic, and harmonic components, each of which individually may represent a different style or time but collectively combine in pieces that are reflective of musical eras past yet refreshingly modern.

Syrian Pianist Malek Jandali

The first and last tracks of the album serve as bookends to the broad spectrum of Jandali’s musical melting pot. With clear historical illusions to an era and place influenced by Arab culture, “Andalus” dramatically opens the album: the rhapsody’s introduction, which features a rhythmic augmentation of the melody played in octaves on the piano supported by rolled chords, gives way to a seductively playful Eastern melody that dances atop tango rhythms articulated in the strings and on the piano.

And while “Andalus” presents un-mistakable cultural evocations, the album’s last piece, “Arabesque,” features a more nuanced melding of styles. The waltz-like opening presents a sweeping melody—drenched in nostalgia—that is initially played in the strings and eventually echoed and elaborated in a piano solo. Subsequently, as the primary musical thought is tossed back and forth between the piano and the orchestra, interludes of more Arabic-like music—denotable through the addition of vibrant, rhythmic sections with sharp accentuation, beautiful ornamentation, and varied instrumentation (particularly when the solo oboe plays the melody)—are skillfully woven in.

For all of its magnificent moments, however, Echoes from Ugarit has its shortcomings. The album lacks variation in that all pieces are piano concerto-like, showcasing solo piano with orchestral accompaniment. Jandali spent the greater part of his musical education training as a pianist, studying at Jugendmusikschule in Germany where he was born, at the Conservatory of Music and the High Institute of Music in Damascus, Syria, and at the North Carolina School of the Arts before beginning his forays into composition.

Consequently the structure of his music—most of which hovers in minor keys—tends to showcase him more as a pianist than as a composer. (For example “Piano Dream,” where a whimsically ornamented melody twists and turns over fast-paced, broken-up chords in the left hand of the piano accompaniment, shows his technical ability to play crisply and precisely without ever sacrificing the continuity of the musical line.) But Jandali does not provide music that is exclusively for orchestra or that prominently features instruments other than the piano.

The compositional structure of the music he does provide, however, has several strengths. Jandali is particularly adept at achieving a fluid dialogue between the piano and orchestra, at times using one to comment on or punctuate the other’s musical idea or initiating a call-and-response figure between the two. “Leil” (“Night”) most vividly demonstrates these exchanges, especially between the piano and solo instruments such as the clarinet, flute, and horn. The piece is filled with the rich, brooding harmonies reminiscent of German romanticism and features a vacillation between extremes of emotions, musically captured through sharp contrasts in dynamics (loud versus soft) and orchestral texture (dense versus thin).

Perhaps Jandali’s most intriguing piece is the one from which the album draws its name. “Echoes from Ugarit” demands that listeners be engaged more on an intellectual level than on an emotional one. Its theoretical underpinnings, which one understands only by reading the CD liner notes in Arabic or English, outshine their aural manifestations.

“Echoes from Ugarit” is inspired by the oldest music in the world found on tablets dating back to 3400 BCE in the ancient Syrian city of Ugarit. These tablets denote an accompanied, sung hymn of an infertile woman directing her prayers to a moon goddess.

In light of this information, the compositional structure makes perfect sense: with the tonic repeatedly sounding in the bass and a line of ascending and descending triplet thirds and seconds in the low stings and bassoon, a haunting melody floats above complex and often dissonant harmonies. Jandali gives listeners a dark and sullen supplication of a grieving woman; however, the piece is defined primarily by its harmonies, and its chant-like melody leaves listeners wanting. Consequently, as in a stream of consciousness, the piece has forward motion without a definite shape or direction.

Still in naming the album Echoes from Ugarit—it encompassing the numerous musical and cultural colors that it does—Jandali reminds audiences that even an ancient civilization and the place that cradles it is more than a lifeless point of origin. The musical echoes to which it gives birth go on to ricochet between eras, places, and cultures, with some frequencies becoming lost and others reinforced depending on the space in which they are cast. Jandali’s debut work will leave listeners blissfully content for the moment and eagerly awaiting where he will take them in his future releases.

_________

Syrian-American soprano and pianist Salma Al-Shami holds a Bachelor of Music in voice and opera performance and a Bachelor of Arts in political science from Northwestern University (Evanston, IL). Performing regularly in New York where she currently resides, she will be a Fulbright Fellow in Syria for the 2009-2010 year before returning to Northwestern to pursue her doctoral degree in political science.

If Washington is going to make a good faith effort to restrain Israel’s territorial acquisitiveness, it should not be signing an agreement to sell 75 new US F-35 fighters to Israel, at least not yet. Israel’s superior air power convinced Olmert that he could kill Israel’s enemies rather than negotiate with them. Further increasing Israel’s military superiority will not diminish this bad habit. Equally, the Obama administration should not be pressing the “IAEA to…. push for special inspections in Syria,” at least not yet. (See this article about how the US is offering the IAEA an 8% increase in money if it presses the Syria case, among other things.) Washington seems blind to the fact that its efforts to improve Israel’s military might while chipping away at its rivals makes Israel impervious to entreaties that it fulfill international law. One the one hand, Washington claims it has no means to make Israel give up the Golan, and on the other, it doesn’t even try.

The Saudi outreach may come at a price that the US is not happy to see paid…”
July 11, 2009 MEPGS, (Via FLC)

“The Saudis want to persuade Iran’s erstwhile allies, notably Syria, that Teheran is a weak regime,” says one veteran analyst. Another notes, “The uprising has killed the myth of Iran stability.” One problem with this approach, say US officials, is that, in the case of Syria, the Saudi outreach may come at a price that the US is not happy to see paid. Specifically, they worry that the Saudis will reduce their support for their allies in the Lebanese government in order to attract Syria. Already, their protege, Saad Hariri, has seen Saudi support for a more independent Lebanese stance towards Syria dissipate. Or as one US official put it last week, “The Saudis may be willing to sell out Lebanon for Arab unity against Iran.” [US officials say they have remonstrated with the Saudis about this, but so far to little effect].

Israel-US F-35 deal ‘targets Iran, Syria defense’
Sun, 12 Jul 2009
An F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

Israel’s plans to buy US F-35 fighters indicate its desire to be able to penetrate the Russian air defense systems Iran and Syria are set to receive, a report says.

F-35 fighter aircraft can make the S-300 air defense systems ineffective, as computer simulations have shown that the new US stealth fighters outperform Russian missiles, Ria Novosti cited officials in Tel Aviv as saying…..

The final price for the model, estimated at over $100 million, and technical details of the deal still remain to be determined however…..

Predictions are that the final contract will be signed in early 2010 with the US promising to deliver a third of the 75 estimated F-35 fighters to Israel by 2014….

Obama for closer ‘engagement’ with Syria

LONDON (AFP) — US President Barack Obama said he was troubled by Syria’s behaviour but hoped for progress in ties with former foe Damascus, in an interview to be screened Sunday.

Obama was asked by Britain’s Sky News television if he would accept an invitation to go to Damascus for face-to-face talks with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“We’ve started to see some diplomatic contacts between the United States and Syria,” Obama said, in an interview recorded during Saturday’s visit to Ghana.

“There are aspects of Syrian behaviour that trouble us and we think that there is a way that Syria can be much more constructive on a whole host of these issues.

“But, as you know, I’m a believer in engagement and my hope is that we can continue to see progress on that front.”

Assad said earlier this month that he would be willing to meet Obama in Syria to discuss Middle East issues.

“We would like to welcome him in Syria, definitely. I am very clear about this,” he told Sky News.

State, Mitchell were in the loop on Syria
Ben Smith at Politico: July 10, 2009

I quoted approvingly today from a Jim Hoagland column that I thought got a couple of the big things right on Obama’s foreign policy: The unified front of principals, and the policy-making White House core.

I’ve also heard from some of the people involved, though, that the column was wrong in its lede, and what it casts as a telling anecdote and “misstep”:

Surprised to see the news the other day that the Obama administration is sending an ambassador back to Syria? So was Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Officials there were still negotiating with Damascus to win some movement on Middle East issues when President Obama’s decision was leaked.

That really doesn’t match the account I’ve gotten.

I’m told the recommendation came in a memo from Mitchell to Clinton and Obama after his mid-June meeting with Syrian President Assad. The decision was discussed in a Deputies Committee that included the powerful Deputy Secretary of State, Jim Steinberg as well as a Mitchell aide, Fred Hoff. Clinton’s personal staff on the seventh floor was aware of the recommendation before it was announced, as was the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman.

Hoagland’s column suggests that others in Foggy Bottom were taken aback, but both Clinton and Mitchell — the central negotiator on the ground in the Middle East — were in the loop on this one.

New chapter for Syria-Saudi relations
Phil Sands, Foreign Correspondent, UAE / July 10. 2009

The Syrian president, Bashar Assad, angered his peers in the Middle East when he called them “half men ” for not supporting Hizbollah during Israel’s 2006 war on Lebanon. Louai Beshara / AFP

Damascus: If America’s decision to send an ambassador to Syria, after years of ice-cold relations between Damascus and Washington, signals a shift in the Middle East’s political atmosphere, this week’s announcement by Saudi Arabia that it will do the same is a clear sign that a new chapter is really beginning……

….. For decades Syria has doggedly insisted that the underlying situation can be solved only with a comprehensive regional peace agreement that sees it regain the Golan Heights. Regardless of American or Saudi ambassadors being posted to Damascus, or efforts to weaken the Syrian-Iranian alliance, if that does not happen, any new chapter is doomed to have the same old ending.

Netanyahu’s paranoia extends to ’self-hating Jews’ Emanuel and Axelrod
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz

……Netanyahu appears to be suffering from confusion and paranoia. He is convinced that the media are after him, that his aides are leaking information against him and that the American administration wants him out of office. Two months after his visit to Washington, he is still finding it difficult to communication normally with the White House. To appreciate the depth of his paranoia, it is enough to hear how he refers to Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod, Obama’s senior aides: as “self-hating Jews.”

The [Israeli] Foreign Ministry unveiled a new plan this week: Paying talkbackers to post pro-Israel responses on websites worldwide. A total of NIS 600,000 (roughly $150,000) will be earmarked to the establishment of an “Internet warfare” squad.

The Foreign Ministry intends to hire young people who speak at least one language and who study communication, political science, or law – or alternately, Israelis with military experience gained at units dealing with information analysis.

How to talk to Non-Jews about Israel - the 2009 Global Language Dictionary

http://ndn3.newsweek.com/media/9/israel-settlements-luntz-selling-wide-horizontal.jpg

Frank Luntz

A 116 page secret manual used to school American Jewish leaders in how to effectively discuss Israel has been leaked to Newsweek.

How do you sell the American public on the idea that Israel has the right to maintain or even expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank? Be positive. Turn the issue away from settlements and toward peace. Invoke ethnic cleansing.

Those are three of the recommendations made by Frank Luntz, a political consultant and pollster, in an internal study he wrote for the Washington-based group The Israel Project (TIP) on effective ways to talk to Americans about the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
Full report

Here are some excerpts provided by an SC reader:

Rules
10) Draw direct parallels between Israel and America—including the need to defend against terrorism.
The language of Israel is the language of America: “democracy,” “freedom,” “security,” and “peace.”
12) No matter what you are asked, bridge to a productive pro-Israel message. When asked a direct question, you don’t have to answer it directly. You are in control of what you say and how you say it.
13) Talk about the future, not the past.
14) Hope.
15) Use rhetorical questions. Avoid head on attacks of your opponents. Use a soft tone. Show regret that the Palestinians have been led so poorly.
17) K.I.S.S. and tell and tell again and again. A key rule of successful communications is “Keep It Simple, Stupid”. Successful communications is not about being able to recite every fact from the long history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is about pointing out a few core principles of shared values—such as democracy and freedom—and repeating them over and over again.
18) Avoid “analysis paralysis” and be pro-active.
22) Never, never, NEVER speak in declarative statements. Never.

• “Living together, side by side. This is the best way to describe the ultimate vision of a two-state solution without using the phrase.

Chapter 3
HOW TO TALK ABOUT PALESTINIAN SELF GOVERNMENT & PROSPERITY

That said, it is important to note that there are effective ways to uphold the ultimate goal of a Palestinian self-government while legitimately questioning how soon the solution can be reached. This is the rhetorical area in which you need to operate.

5) The fight is over IDEOLOGY – not land; terror, not territory. Thus, you must avoid using Israel’s religious claims to land as a reason why Israel should not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look extremist to people who are not religious Christians or Jews.

Chapter 5:
THE LANGUAGE TACKLING A NUCLEAR IRAN

Note also the use of Arab nations to marginalize Iran. Just as we recommend in the chapter about Hamas, there is immense value in isolating Iran’s leadership as being out of step with Arab neighbors. Many Americans would be surprised to know that these nations are afraid of Iran, just like Israel. By surprising them, you open their minds to the rest of your message.

Chapter 8:
SETTLEMENTS

1) Talk about “a willingness to negotiate” and “Camp David” in the same sentence.
4) The settlements are necessary for the security of Israel.

—-

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem that Damascus would not restart peace talks unless Israel showed willingness to discuss a full withdrawal. (Jerusalem Post)

Israel must stay ‘deep in Golan’

The Golan Heights are militarily strategic and a key water source

An aide to Israel’s prime minister has said Israel must keep a large part of the Golan Heights, rejecting Syria’s major demand for a peace deal.

The previous government held indirect talks with Syria, assumed to be based on returning the Golan Heights, occupied in 1967, in return for peace.

In June, Syrian President Bashar Assad said there was no partner for talks on the Israeli side.

Correspondents say the aide’s comments will serve to reinforce this view.

Syria has remained in a state of war with Israel since its 1948 foundation.

Israel took control of the Golan Heights, a strategic mountainous area now popular with Israeli holidaymakers, during the 1967 Six Day War.

‘Integral role’

The comments come amid a thaw in relations between the US and Syria.

US President Barack Obama has sent envoys on a series of visits, and Mr Assad recently invited the US president himself to Damascus.

US Middle East envoy George Mitchell recently visited Syria and said Damascus had an “integral role” in finding peace in the region.

But the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stands to the right of his predecessor, Ehud Olmert.

Correspondents say the new government’s emerging position makes an Israeli-Syrian deal look unlikely.

“The position is that, if there is a territorial compromise, it is one that still leaves Israel on the Golan Heights and deep into the Golan Heights,” the aide, Uzi Arad, said in an interview with Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

He said the Israeli government was willing to resume negotiations with “no prior conditions”, but Israeli control of parts of the territory was necessary for “strategic, military and land-settlement reasons… needs of water, wine and landscape”.

Syria wants the entire territory back.

The Golan Heights is currently home to about 18,000 Israeli settlers and another 17,000 Druze Arabs loyal to Syria.

Top adviser to Netanyahu: Israel will not leave entire Golan even in peace deal
MATTI FRIEDMAN, Associated Press, July 10, 2009

Israel needs to retain part of the Golan “for strategic, military and settlement reasons. For water, landscape and wine,” said Arad. He nonetheless called on the Syrians to resume peace talks with Israel with no preconditions but “with each side aware of the other’s position.”……

Under U.S. pressure, Netanyahu has accepted the idea of a Palestinian state, an idea he long opposed. But in the Haaretz interview, Arad took a dim view of the Palestinian leadership, saying he saw not a government but a “disorderly constellation of forces and factions.”

There “could be worse” leaders than Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Arad said. “But even with him I don’t see a real interest and desire to arrive at the end of the conflict with Israel. On the contrary. He is preserving eternal claims against us and inflaming them,” he said.

Syria: Israel’s most valuable partner for peace
By Jamal Bittar Friday, 07.10.2009, 05:17pm

The recent gesture by the Obama administration to re-open the U.S. embassy in Damascus and renew talks with the Syrian government was meant to lay the groundwork for a resumption of Israeli-Syrian talks under American auspices. There is indeed a window of opportunity for Israel to make peace with another Arab country, which if achieved, would ultimately bring peace to the whole region.

Many hardliners in Israel feel the U.S. has managed to find and support the only nation in the region that is actively anti-peace, and who will return absolutely nothing for peace. They say “this idea that Syria can produce peace is an old liberal idea.” But so was the idea that Egypt could produce peace, and it did. It still does. No more war, no more bloodshed on the Israel-Egypt border for over 30 years. How many young Israelis and Egyptians owe their lives to this “old liberal idea?”

Syria indeed has more to offer Israel than any other country in the region. The Syrians have the Golan Heights issue, in which it is supported by the international community. Syria borders Iraq and could have a significant impact on Iraq’s future. Syria has major influence in Lebanese politics, to Israel’s dismay. They carry the Hamas and Hizbullah cards in their hand and enjoy the alliance with Iran, which annoys and disturbs Israel. Therefore, Syria is the nearest and strongest enemy of Israel; you cannot rule them out. Syria can offer everything and nothing. It has a lot of support in the Arab world. Without a genuine peace with Syria, Israel will never have peace with the Palestinians; there will always be bloodshed.

By making a true friend of Syria, the U.S. can put all of these things on the table and perhaps negate them. All it would take is the return of the Golan Heights and a few billion dollars a year in aid. For Obama, this is the bargain of the century. The current investment in Israel has returned only thirty years of settlement expansion and failed peace efforts. It has raised a generation of Israelis who feel entitled to American aid and who balk at American influence.

If the U.S. had continued to alienate the Syrian regime, that could have increased the likelihood of an emergence of domestic tensions, notably among the Kurds and the Muslim Brotherhood. We have all seen the effects of such domestic tensions in Iraq. The U.S. cannot find a substitute for Bashar Assad’s regime. Unlike the case with Iraq, it is difficult to identify a prominent Syrian opponent to the Syrian leader, inside or outside of the country.

The new Assad has proven himself to be a man of principle making the best of a difficult agenda. His approach to negotiations with Israel is correct. Assad’s argument all along has been that the only way you can really get a systematic peace process going now is bringing in America to broker it. And the American role would be very important. It’s a tremendous challenge for the Obama administration diplomatically: nurse an agreement over the Golan Heights, which everybody seems to want, and use that to start talking about regional peace.

And that would mean bringing Iran into the process while holding off the Israelis. The Israelis are interested in a Golan Heights settlement because they see a settlement with Syria over the Golan Heights as an issue that would isolate the Iranians from the Syrians and, therefore, give the Israelis more leverage to go after Iran, if they choose to do so, if they view Iran as a strategic threat. They don’t view the Palestinian issue, whether Hamas or Fatah, as a strategic issue. The Israelis see it as a tactical issue. The problem for Israel is that the Syrians have a different motive for dealing with it. They’re not interested in walking away from the Iranian agreement.

If the Obama administration can get into a possible settlement of the Golan Heights dispute, land for peace, we can get a regional peace process going. And then the United States would have to also accept the idea that Iran should participate. Richard Holbrooke recently talked about the inevitability of having Iran involved, because for the United States, you have to look at the idea of having Syria, Turkey and Iran all together, all border countries playing an enormous role in making sure that the Iraqis — as we walk out of Iraq, and making sure that that happens safely— have a lot to say about what’s going to happen inside Iraq. They can be moderating influences. Therefore, we can see the potential for an enormous sort of a change in the paradigm.

President Obama is looking for partners for peace in the Middle East. It takes brilliant and courageous leaders to make bold and decisive decisions; Israel has lacked those leaders due to corruption and a total disregard for the safety and peaceful existence of the Jewish state.

For decades, Israel has been able to indulge their greed for Arab land and their greed for American support at the same time. Now the time has arrived in which they will have to choose one and let go of the other. It still seems a good deal. Better be careful not to lose both.

The writer is professor of interdisciplinary studies at the University of Toledo.

Syrian President dissolves the Office of National Security (Maktab al-`amn al-qawmi) and replaces it with a National Security Council (Majlis al-`amn al-watani).

The Office of National Security is appointed by the REgional Command of hte Baath Party. The new body will be civilian and subject to the regular laws of government employment.

We must wait to see if the President will establish the new body under his office as president or under his office as leader of the Regional Command of the Baath Party. In theory, if he reestablishes the body under his authority as president and not as head of the Baath Party, the authority of the Baath Party will be diminished.

All4Syria

الرئيس السوري يلغي مكتب الأمن القومي

خاص (كلنا شركاء)
10/ 07/ 2009
علمت ( كلنا شركاء) أن السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد قد أصدر مرسوماً ذي الرقم 36 لم يعمم , يقضي بإلغاء مكتب الأمن القومي واستبداله بمجلس للأمن الوطني من مهماته رسم السياسات الأمنية في سورية. وجاء في المرسوم ان العاملين في هذا المجلس هم عمال مدنيون يتم توظيفهم وفق قانون العاملين الموحد وهو القانون الذي يخضع له كل العاملون في المؤسسات والشركات والإدارات المملوكة من الحكومة , ويرأس حالياً مكتب الأمن القومي الذي هو احد مكاتب القيادة القطرية لحزب البعث الحاكم في سورية الرفيق اللواء هشام اختيار الذي اختير لهذا المنصب في المؤتمر القطري الاخير الذي عقد في حزيران 2005 , وكان يرأسه قبل ذلك الرفيق محمد سعيد بختيان والذي تم ترفيعه ليصبح نائباً لرئيس حزب البعث في نفس المؤتمر .
والقيادة القطرية تضم 14 عضو وهي أعلى هيئة قيادية تدير سياسة حزب البعث الحاكم في سورية وتجتمع اسبوعيا لاتخاذ القرارات في المواضيع المطروحة مرتين : المرة الأولى يوم الثلاثاء وهو اجتماع مكاتب القيادة ويطلق عليه اسم اجتماع ” متفرغون ” ويوم الاربعاء وهو لكل اعضاء القيادة القطرية ما عدا السيد الرئيس الذي نادراً ما يحضر واذا ما قرر الحضور فانه يطلب اعضاء القيادة جميعاً للحضور للاجتماع به في القصر الجمهوري ، بينما مكتب الامن القومي يجتمع أسبوعيا في مقره الكائن مقابل منزل السفير الأميركي وذلك على مستوى قادة الاجهزة الامنية الأربعة مع رئيس المكتب وذلك للتنسيق فيما بينها بالمسائل الامنية اضافة لرفع التوصيات المتعلقة بالقضايا الامنية على مستوى البلد وبكل السياسات الداخلية والخارجية المتعلقة بالأمن القومي ورفعها للسيد الرئيس لاقرارها .

ولم يتبين حتى الساعة الطريقة التي سينفذ بها المرسوم والآلية التي ستتبع لإدارته واختيار عناصره ولكن من الواضح ان هناك رغبة في توسيع قاعدة المشاركة في صياغة القرارات المتعلقة بالامن القومي بدل ان تكون مرتبطة بمجموعة ضباط لتتوسع وتضم مدنيين ذووخبرات يعرفون العالم ويحسنون الحديث بلغته !
اضافة لتنسيق العمل التقليدي وضبطه بدل شنططة المواطن وبهدلته بالتنقل بين الفروع الامنية الكثيرة ومراجعتها كلا على حدة لنفس السبب
ولكن الامر الاخطر والذي قد يكون هو المحرك الرئيسي وراء هذا القرار هو هل سيرتبط المجلس الجديد بشخص السيد بشار الاسد بصفته رئيساً للجمهورية او بصفته اميناً قطريا لحزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي ؟
لانه اذا كان الامر بصفته رئيس الجمهورية فهذا يعني سحبه من مظلة حزب البعث الحاكم وهي قد تعتبر اكبر خطوة لاضعاف حزب البعث منذ عام 1963 بسحب ذراعه الامنية منه
وخصوصا ان القانون يعتبر ان ادارة امن الدولة تتبع لحزب البعث ويتم استخدام مكتب الامن القومي لدراسة جميع المرشحين لشغل كل وظائف الدولة من الصغير للكبير يعني من الآذن والفراش الى رئيس الوزراء حيث ترسل القيادة القطرية اسماء المرشحين لشغل الوظائف له ليعيدها مع تقييمات الاجهزة الامنية لكل الاسماء وبهذه الطريقة تقوم القيادة القطرية بتقييم ومن ثم تعيين شاغلي الوظائف العامة .
وسنوافيكم تباعا بما يستجد حول هذا الموضوع اضافة للدراسات التي بناءاً عليها تم اتخاذ القرار وخلفياته وكيفية تنفيذه

Misguided Missiles

Injured Liberty crewmembers are escorted to a memorial service on the deck of the aircraft carrier America on June 10, 1967.

Injured Liberty crewmembers are escorted to a memorial service on the deck of the aircraft carrier America on June 10, 1967. (National Archives - National Archives)

THE ATTACK ON THE LIBERTY: Book review in the Washington Post
By John Lancaster
Sunday, July 12, 2009

The Untold Story of Israel’s Deadly 1967 Assault on a U.S. Spy Ship …..

The record of the Navy’s civilian and military leadership was less inspiring. Though privately furious, U.S. officials lied about the nature of the Liberty’s mission and, Scott writes, were so eager to avoid stirring up public anger toward Israel that at one point they contemplated scuttling the ship to prevent news organizations from photographing the damage. Adm. John McCain, Jr., the father of the Arizona senator and 2008 presidential candidate, comes in for especially sharp criticism. As the head of the Navy’s inquiry, Scott writes, McCain understood that a “report critical of Israel would trigger diplomatic ramifications for the State Department and create domestic political trouble for the beleaguered White House, which now wanted to deemphasize the attack.” As a consequence, he contends, McCain barred his investigators from traveling to Israel to interview the attackers and allowed only a week to complete the probe, “less time than it took to bury some of the dead.” …..

Scott cites transcripts of conversations between the Israeli pilots and air controllers in Tel Aviv to show that at least some Israeli commanders were aware of the Liberty’s identity before the attack. He also shows that many U.S. officials — including then-CIA director Richard Helms — were privately scornful of Israel’s explanation. Some believed the attack may have been ordered by a battlefield commander who feared that Israel’s combat orders, if detected by the Liberty, might somehow leak to the Arabs.

Scott clearly has his own suspicions, though he produces no smoking-gun evidence to support the charge of a deliberate attack, perhaps because none exists. In that sense, his book is likely to disappoint the conspiracy theorists as much as it angers proponents of the “fog of war” defense offered by Israel. But Scott is wise to leave the speculating to others. The story is shocking enough as it is.

Guests:
Joshua Landis, Co-Director of the Center for Peace Studies at the University of Oklahoma; Author of SyriaComment.com blog

Mona Yacoubian, Director, Lebanon Working Group, U.S. Institute of Peace

In recent elections, Lebanese voters sent a pro-Western majority to parliament, denying a challenge from the militant Hezbollah. We look at the challenges ahead for the newly-named Prime Minister Saad Hariri — son of slain former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri — and look at the foreign powers like Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S. are likely to play. Windows Media

Daily Star (Via FLC)

“French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on Wednesday that Syrian president Bashar Assad “kept the commitments” that he had promised France concerning Lebanon. Sarkozy was speaking to reporters in L’Aquilla, Italy at the opening of the G8 Summit. Following the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, French-Syrian ties deteriorated considerably. However, in 2008 ties were revived following a visit by Sarkozy, newly elected at the time, to Syria …”

Maya Bengal in Ma’ariv: Obama Lets Settlements grow (Via Pulse and FLC)

The Americans have agreed to allow Israel to construct some 2,500 housing units in the settlements. This is in complete contrast to statements relayed to Israel in recent months, since the new administration took office.

The agreement was secured after Defense Minister Ehud Barak was able to convince the Americans to allow Israel to continue and build those units whose construction had already started. In other words, the Americans gave their consent to letting the construction continue of some 700 buildings, which amount to some 2,500 housing units.

Upon his return to Israel, the defense minister reported to the forum of six - which includes, besides himself, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and ministers Avigdor Lieberman, Dan Meridor, Benny Begin, Moshe (Bugi) Yaalon - on the results of the meeting.

In addition, an understanding was reached between Mitchell and Barak that if it was indeed decided to halt settlement construction in the West Bank, this would occur only in the framework of regional negotiations - in which both Syria and Lebanon would also take part.

The Americans have adopted the position that Israel should not be required to halt settlement construction as a precondition, but rather only when the peace process with the Arab countries and the Palestinian Authority gets on track.

A week from now, special envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell will arrive once again in Israel and is expected to meet with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Incidentally, sources close to the defense minister are now saying that the level of tension between Washington and Jerusalem has abated.

According to them, the Americans have worked to accommodate Israel and the atmosphere in now more constructive.

Syrian Souvenirs for Steinmeier
By Yassin Musharbash in Damascus, Syria

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier sees Syria and its president, Bashar Assad, as an important regional player, a key to Mideast peace. In Damascus, Assad did all he could to accomodate this leap of faith, showing a willingness to find a middle ground even on hot-button issues.

Steinmeier stressed in Syria, as he had done in Israel on Monday, that the current opportunity may be short-lived. He believes Obama provided impetus by indicating he’s ready to take a tougher line with Israel. Now the players in the region have to position themselves. Negotiations have to start very quickly, Steinmeier said in Damascus. “The chances we have must be seized this year, otherwise the window will close,” he said.

He wants Palestinians and Israelis to start final status negotiations this autumn to replace a “peace process” that has been torpedoed and watered down all too often. That’s the position shared by the United States and Steinmeier. It’s worth a try after the failure of previous attempts, they believe.

The Syrians, who until now have given the impression that time is the least of their concerns, were surprisingly clear on Tuesday in agreeing that time was now of the essence. Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem hinted that Syria’s ties with Iran — a sticking point with the international community — may no longer be a taboo issue.

Asked by a journalist what he thought of the US demand that Syria divorce itself from Tehran in exchange for a return of the Golan Heights occupied by Israel, he said no one could predict what would happen to the relationship once the Golan Heights were returned to Syria.

The minister also reaffirmed at a joint news conference with Steinmeier that his country remained ready to negotiate with Israel. But he added that he would prefer the talks initially to be held indirectly via Turkish mediation. Israel is currently signalling that it would prefer to negotiate directly with Damascus. So the issue here is not whether but how — a further tentative sign of rapprochement. …

بقرار من الرئيس الأسد، تسريح اللواء الدكتور شاليش!

السفير السوري في واشنطن: سوريا “صعقت” لتجديد العقوبات الأميـركية

في تقرير بريطاني: سورية ثالث أسعد دولة عربية والـ 38 عالمياً!

الرئيس السوري يصدر أمراً بخصوص المخابرات, يؤكد مصداقية (كلنا شركاء)!

القناة الفضائية نينار “رامي مخلوف” قريباً على الشاشة

The Syian and Iranian relationship:

Ray Takeyh’s new book, Guardians of the Revolution: Iran and the World in the Age of Ayatollahs, has an interesting section on the Syrian-Iranian relationship. Here it is posted to the Oxford University Press Blog. Tayekh, a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, writes about the relationship between Iran and Syria, beginning with the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the Iran-Syria alliance that followed.

Al Jazeera English signs first major US TV deal

Mossad chief Dagan stirs the pot
2009-07-07 16:28:05.10 GMT

TEL AVIV, Israel, July 7 (UPI) — Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s decision to extend the tenure of former army Gen. Meir Dagan as head of the Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence service, by a year has got the nation wondering what clandestine missions the man the liberal daily Haaretz calls “the angel of destruction” will think up next……

Dagan “is said to have returned the agency to its glory days,” says the Jerusalem Post.
He has notched what his peers see as several major successes. Most of these remain shrouded in mystery, but there have been reports that key scientists in Iran’s nuclear program died in mysterious circumstances.

More in the public domain, however, was the discovery of what Israel says was a North Korean-built nuclear reactor in western Syria and its subsequent destruction by the Israeli air force in September 2007 and long-range air strikes in Sudan against alleged shipments of Iranian arms being smuggled to Hamas in Gaza in January and February 2009.

But possibly the most spectacular operation widely attributed to Dagan’s Mossad was the February 2008 assassination of Hezbollah’s legendary operations chief, Imad Mughniyeh, in the heart of Damascus, the Syrian capital.

Controversial Bestseller Shakes the Foundation of the Israeli State
By Joshua Holland

What if the Palestinian Arabs who have lived for decades under the heel of the modern Israeli state are in fact descended from the very same “children of Israel” described in the Old Testament? And what if most modern Israelis aren’t descended from the ancient Israelites at all, but are actually a mix of Europeans, North Africans and others who didn’t “return” to the scrap of land we now call Israel and establish a new state following the attempt to exterminate them during World War II, but came in and forcefully displaced people whose ancestors had lived there for millennia?

What if the entire tale of the Jewish Diaspora — the story recounted at Passover tables by Jews around the world every year detailing the ancient Jews’ exile from Judea, the years spent wandering through the desert, their escape from the Pharaoh’s clutches — is all wrong?

That’s the explosive thesis of When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?, a book by Tel Aviv University scholar Shlomo Zand (or Sand) that sent shockwaves across Israeli society when it was published last year. After 19 weeks on the Israeli best-seller list, the book is being translated into a dozen languages and will be published in the United States this year by Verso…..

Inventing a People?

Zand’s central argument is that the Romans didn’t expel whole nations from their territories. Zand estimates that perhaps 10,000 ancient Judeans were vanquished during the Roman wars, and the remaining inhabitants of ancient Judea remained, converting to Islam and assimilating with their conquerors when Arabs subjugated the area. They became the progenitors of today’s Palestinian Arabs, many of whom now live as refugees who were exiled from their homeland during the 20th century.

As Israeli journalist Tom Segev summarized, in a review of the book in Ha’aretz:

There never was a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened — hence there was no return. Zand rejects most of the stories of national-identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and, most satisfactorily, the horrors of the conquest under Joshua.

But this begs the question: if the ancient people of Judea weren’t expelled en masse, then how did it come to pass that Jewish people are scattered across the world? According to Zand, who offers detailed histories of several groups within what is conventionally known as the Jewish Diaspora, some were Jews who emigrated of their own volition, and many more (90%) were later converts to Judaism. Contrary to popular belief, Zand argues that Judaism was an evangelical religion that actively sought out new adherents during its formative period.

This narrative has huge significance in terms of Israel’s national identity. If Judaism is a religion, rather than “a people” descended from a dispersed nation, then it brings into question the central justification for the state of Israel remaining a “Jewish state.”…..

Sexy Brit bringing Syria in from the cold
By OLIVER HARVEY
Chief Feature Writer for The SUN - what else

Born in the west London suburb of Acton, she speaks with a cut-glass English accent and her childhood friends called her Emma.

She is Asma al Assad - First Lady of Syria - and she is certainly not the average Arab dictator’s wife.

She likes to show off her willowy form in figure-hugging jeans and her mousy brown hair is cut in a stylish flicked bob. ….

The Muslim Challenge to Nationalism
July 6, 2009, By James Brazier, London Correspondent

There is plenty of evidence that the world’s Muslims do not take the nation-state for granted. WorldPublicOpinion.org, supported by the University of Maryland, has run two sets of surveys in Muslim-majority countries to gauge public opinion of geopolitical affairs. The most recent poll, “Public Opinion in the Islamic World on Terrorism, al Qaeda, and U.S. Policies”, published in February 2009, produced much the same results as the first one two years earlier.

Both surveys showed majority support for a new Caliphate in some large Muslim countries. According to the latest survey, 70 percent of Egyptians believe Egypt should be erased in favour of a superstate. Sixty-nine percent of Pakistanis agreed that their country should be dissolved in a similar fashion while, according to the 2006 survey, 67 percent of Moroccans felt likewise. Indonesians, far-flung from the centre of Islamic geography and never a party to historical Caliphates, mostly rejected the idea (although 35 percent did not).

Respondents tended to view the system of nation-states as a foreign conspiracy designed to weaken and divide Muslims. Large majorities in every country polled (Egypt, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Morocco, Palestine, Iran, and Azerbaijan) cited “weaken and divide” as the main policy goal of the United States in the Muslim world. There was even greater unanimity as to why the U.S. sought this weakness and division: control over oil. This belief was “so widespread as to be consensual,” according to the report’s authors.

Few respondents believed that the U.S. genuinely supports democracy. Large majorities concluded either that the U.S. actively opposes free elections in their countries (especially respondents in Jordan and Egypt), or that the U.S. seeks democracy only when it is likely to result in a cooperative government.

Risking Israel’s ire, US takes 1,350 Palestinian refugees
By Patrik Jonsson | The Christian Science Monitor, July 7, 200

The State Department confirmed today that as many as 1,350 Iraqi Palestinians – once the well-treated guests of Saddam Hussein and now at outs with much of Iraqi society – will be resettled in the US, mostly in southern California, starting this fall.

It will be the largest-ever resettlement of Palestinian refugees into the US – and welcome news to the Palestinians who fled to Iraq after 1948 but who have had a tough time since Mr. Hussein was deposed in 2003. Targeted by Iraqi Shiites, the mostly-Sunni Palestinians have spent recent years in one of the region’s roughest refugee camps, Al Waleed, near Iraq’s border with Syria.

“Really for the first time, the United States is recognizing a Palestinian refugee population that could be admitted to the US as part of a resettlement program,” says Bill Frelick, refugee policy director at Human Rights Watch in Washington.

Given the US’s past reluctance to resettle Palestinians – it accepted just seven Palestinians in 2007 and nine in 2008 – the effort could ruffle some diplomatic feathers.

For many in the State Department and international community, the resettlement is part of a moral imperative the US has to clean up the refugee crisis created by invading Iraq. The US has already stepped up resettlement of Iraqis, some who have struggled to adjust to life in America.

The resettlement of Iraqi Palestinians is “an important gesture for the United States to demonstrate that we’re not heartless,” says Alon Ben-Meir, a professor of international relations and Middle Eastern studies at New York University.

But some critics say the State Department is sloughing off its problems onto American cities, especially since in this case the Palestinians were sympathizers of Hussein, who was deposed by the US.

“This is politically a real hot potato,” says Mark Krikorian, director of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, adding, “[A]merica has become a dumping ground for the State Department’s problems – they’re tossing their problems over their head into Harrisburg, Pa., or Omaha, Neb.”

SADDAM’S GUESTS
Palestinian refugees came to Iraq in successive waves over several decades, first in 1948, then in 1967, and in 1991. They were treated well under Hussein but were also used to attack Israeli policies, and their presence was resented by many Iraqis.

After Hussein was deposed in 2003, many of these Palestinians were driven out of their homes and now live “at the mercy of the weather” in rough camps along the Syrian and Jordanian border, says Mr. Ben-Meir. The number of Palestinians in Iraq has fallen from around 34,000 to an estimated 15,000, with about 2,773 living in camps, according to the State Department.

The US, which takes in about 80,000 refugees annually, hopes to bring 17,000 Iraqi refugees this year.

CATEGORIZED AS IRAQI REFUGEES
While the US generally doesn’t accept Palestinians, Todd Pierce, a spokesman for the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, says that the Iraqi population of Palestinians falls under a different category from those in Gaza and the West Bank. Each applicant will be carefully scrutinized for terrorist ties, he adds.

The US reluctance to accept Palestinians is because it “doesn’t want the refugee program to become an issue in its relationship with Israel,” says a diplomat in the region, who requested anonymity because he is not cleared to talk to the press. But these Palestinians, he says, will be processed as refugees from Iraq.

Mr. Krikorian says the US should be the last refuge for those fleeing persecution. Only Jordan of all the Arab countries routinely grants citizenship to Palestinian refugees, he notes. More recently, says Mr. Frelick, Jordan has also shut its borders to Palestinians coming from Iraq.

Frelick, who has visited a camp on the Jordanian border, said the Iraqi Palestinians are “apolitical,” and “basically desperate, scared, miserable, and ready to just get out of Iraq.”

Resettlement agencies urge an overhaul of America’s 30-year-old refugee policy.

Many Iraqi refugees in US now in dire straits
By Patrik Jonsson and Kristen Chick
The Christian Science Monitor
June 18, 2009

Atlanta; and Lynn, Mass. - It hasn’t been smooth sailing for the thousands of Iraqi refugees entering America’s resettlement program. Only 11 percent are finding work this year, compared with 80 percent two years ago. Many are frustrated as benefits dwindle, cash runs out, and eviction notices pile up.

With such findings in hand, nonprofit resettlement agencies like the International Rescue Committee (IRC) are urging this week an overhaul of America’s three-decade-old refugee policy.

Reforms should include more cash assistance from the US government to the refugees, the IRC says. The government should also offer a uniform and more substantial package of benefits, the IRC says.

Refugees “never imagined that they would be struggling to survive here in America,” says Alaa Naji, a refugee from Baghdad who now works in Atlanta for the IRC. “They expected more from a country that was involved in the violence that destroyed our land, homes, and loved ones.”

Complaints about the handling of refugees have risen as the United States has tried to welcome more Iraqi refugees. Until 2006, only 202 Iraqis had come to the US, partly because of security concerns. In the past three years, 25,659 Iraqi refugees have arrived.

Some argue that US officials have oversold refugees’ prospects. “You’ll see there’s a universal theme to [Iraqis'] complaints, which is that they were told they were going to have a great life, and they’re completely shocked when they’re given jobs like washing cars,” says Ann Corcoran, a Washington County, Md., farmer who runs a critical blog, Refugee Resettlement Watch.

It’s often hard for people to reconcile themselves to the reality of life as a refugee, says Kay Bellor, IRC’s vice president for US programs. Many refugees are highly educated, and they find it difficult to work in menial jobs and give up their earlier lifestyle, she says.

This spring, as a stopgap measure, the State Department released $5 million in emergency rent stipends to help refugees on the verge of eviction. …..

Costa Rica is world’s greenest, happiest country

Latin American nation tops index ranking countries by ecological footprint and happiness of their citizens
(page 63 of 64 in the above pdf file)
syria is number 38
usa is number 114
uae is number 123
saudi is number 13
egypt is number 12
israel is number 67
lebanon is number 111

Egyptians cry racism in woman’s slaying in Germany
By MAGGIE MICHAEL

CAIRO (AP) — Thousands of Egyptian mourners marched behind the coffin of the “martyr of the head scarf” on Monday — a pregnant Muslim woman who was stabbed to death in a German courtroom as her young son watched.

Many in her homeland were outraged by the attack and saw the low key response in Germany as an example of racism and anti-Muslim sentiment.

Her husband was critically wounded in the attack Wednesday in Dresden when he tried to intervene and was stabbed by the attacker and accidentally shot by court security.

“There is no god but God and the Germans are the enemies of God,” chanted the mourners for 32-year-old Marwa al-Sherbini in her hometown of Alexandria, where her body was buried after being flown back from Germany.

“We will avenge her killing,” her brother Tarek el-Sherbini told The Associated Press by telephone from the mosque where prayers were being recited in front of his sister’s coffin. “In the West, they don’t recognize us. There is racism.”

Al-Sherbini, who was about four months pregnant and wore the Islamic head scarf, was involved in a court case against her neighbor for calling her a terrorist and was set to testify against him when he stabbed her 18 times inside the courtroom in front of her 3-year-old son.

Her husband, who was in Germany on a research fellowship, came to her aid and was also stabbed by the neighbor and shot in the leg by a security guard who initially mistook him for the attacker, German prosecutors said. He is now in critical condition in a German hospital, according to al-Sherbini’s brother.

“The guards thought that as long as he wasn’t blond, he must be the attacker so they shot him,” al-Sherbini told an Egyptian television station…..

Walid Muallem

(AFP) Muallem said Syria supported further indirect contacts with Israel, which were frozen after the Jewish state launched a massive offensive against the Gaza Strip in December.

“We think a resumption of indirect contacts with Israel through Turkish go-betweens is the best way of getting to direct negotiations, but first and foremost we have to be confident that there is a political will in Israel to achieve peace,”…

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said Syria deserved Western respect for the constructive role it had played in its smaller neighbor Lebanon in recent months, adding that Damascus did not interfere in the legislative elections and will not interfere in forming Lebanon’s next cabinet.

“Syria did not intervene in the Lebanese elections. Syria will not interfere in the formation of a new Lebanese government, but we want the new government to be a real government of national consensus between all parties that will secure Lebanon’s stability,” he said.

Syria backed a Hizbullah-led alliance in last month’s election in Lebanon that was won by the rival Western-backed coalition of prime minister-designate Rafik Hariri.

Hariri has said he is ready to renew the national unity government formed after factional violence last year, but only on condition that Hizbullah and its allies give up the veto powers on cabinet decisions they enjoyed in the outgoing government

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier urged Syria on Tuesday to do its part to ensure the success of Middle East peace efforts and said “destructive elements” in the region that needed to be reined in.

“Syria has an objective interest in the success of the Middle East peace process and I call on Syria and also my counterpart Mr. Muallem to do its part,” he said at a joint press conference in Damascus with Muallem.

“There is no time to lose,” Steinmeier said after meeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Muallem on the latest leg of a Middle East tour.

But he said the Syrian-backed Lebanese group Hizbullah and the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas had shown “no interest in the success of the peace talks.”…

New Lebanon government awaits Saudi-Syria understanding

Lack of progress in talks between Syria and Saudi Arabia is holding up the formation of a new Beirut government set to group Riyadh’s allies in Lebanon with rivals backed by Damascus, a senior politician said.

Senior Saudi envoys have visited Damascus at least three times since Lebanon’s parliamentary election a month ago, won by the “March 14″ coalition led by Saad al-Hariri and backed by Riyadh and Washington.

The talks have highlighted the influence of Saudi Arabia and Syria in the country……

The last round of talks in Damascus on Friday grouped Saudi Prince Abdul-Aziz, King Abdullah’s son, and Information Minister Abdul-Aziz Khoja, the former Saudi ambassador to Lebanon, with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose country dominated Lebanon until 2005.

The talks ended without a breakthrough needed to smooth the way for Hariri, prime minister-designate, to form the new cabinet, the senior Lebanese politician said on Tuesday.

“The atmosphere is good because Syria and Saudi Arabia are not arguing,” the politician said.The source said the talks had focused on a possible Hariri visit to Syria, which the billionaire politician has accused of his father’s assassination. The Sunni leader, who was raised in Saudi Arabia, is Riyadh’s closest ally in Lebanon.

“The matter of the government formation is moving along naturally,” Hariri said on Saturday. “The government of Lebanon is formed in Lebanon … any other talk is incorrect,” he said.

……”The general impression is negative. The Lebanese have no role in the formation of their government,” Aoun said in an interview with Hezbollah’s al-Manar television.

“None of the Lebanese are involved. Receiving notification of what is going on outside is not participation.”…

Lebanese Opposition insists on its demand for veto power.

“The Opposition respects the President (Suleiman) and his shares in the government, but our shares are ours and his shares are his,” Marada Movement leader Suleiman Franjieh said on Tuesday.

He hoped that the government would be formed in Lebanon.

….

Hariri is faced with three Syrian options:(al-Akhbar headlines translated by Lebanon Now)

…. Up until last Thursday, the dialogue between Riyadh and Damascus had resulted in three proposals submitted by the Syrian president to Prince Abdel Aziz. Bashar Al-Assad tasked the Saudi prince with briefing the Lebanese prime minister-designate on these proposals and conveying a clear position by Hariri in this respect.

The first of these proposals is for Hariri to form a majority government immediately in his capacity as a majority leader.

The second one pertains to the formation of a national unity government. Hariri would have to negotiate with the opposition, which would voice its demands in order to reach an agreement even if this requires that Hariri grant the opposition its obstructing-third demand.

The third proposal is for Hariri to visit Damascus, so that the Syrian leadership gets to know him if Damascus is to act as a mediator between him and the opposition to facilitate the formation of the government.

The leaders of Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Qatar are not to be absent from the Sharm al-Sheikh Summit.(From as-Safir)

Arab sources indicate that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has decided not to take part in the summit of the Non-Aligned Movement set to be held in Sharm al-Sheikh on July 15 and 16. Instead he will send deputy foreign minister, Faisal al-Moqdad….

Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri told his visitors that he will not accept any conditions binding his mission, and that if some insist on these conditions, including the “obstructing third”, he would rather tell the president he cannot form the government.

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem said that the coast is clear for [launching] a political consensus process “in which there is no predominance” and expressed hope that “the prime minister-designate will agree on forming a national unity government.”

A must read — The Qnion — by Qifa Nabki on the Hariri, Assad, Abdullah summit.

SyriaNews: Deputy Prime Minister Dardari says government salaries will be raised 35% until the end on 2010. Over the life of the 2005-2020 five year plan, government salaries will have been raised by close to 100%.

الدردري: زيادة على الرواتب بنسبة 35% حتى نهاية 2010 ومشاريع لتحسين المعيشة

الاخبار الاقتصادية

قال نائب رئيس مجلس الوزراء للشؤون الاقتصادية عبد الله الدردري إن الفترة حتى نهاية العام 2010 ستشهد زيادة في رواتب الموظفين تصل إلى 35%.

ونقلت صحيفة تشرين المحلية في عددها الصادر يوم الثلاثاء عن الدردري قوله إن “الفترة المتبقية من الخطة الخمسية العاشرة ستشهد زيادة للرواتب تصل إلى 35%، وذلك تطبيقاً لما نصّت عليه الخطّة من تحقيق زيادة على رواتب الموظفين تصل إلى 100%”.

وحققت الخطة الخمسية العاشرة 2005-2010 زيادة على رواتب الموظفين بلغت 65% فيما تنص الخطة على زيادة في الرواتب تصل إلى 100%.

وأضاف الدردري أن “النصف المتبقي من هذا العام مع العام القادم سيشهدان تطبيقاً لما ورد في الخطة الخمسية العاشرة التي وعدت بتحقيق زيادة على رواتب الموظفين تصل إلى الضعف عما كانت عليه مع انطلاقة الخطة، مشيرا إلى أن “هذه الزيادة ستأتي متزامنة مع مشروعات حكومية تهدف إلى تحسين معيشة المواطنين بشكل عام”.

وشهد شهر أيار من العام 2008 آخر زيادة على الرواتب والأجور للعاملين بالدولة والمتقاعدين بنسبة 25%، بالإضافة إلى رفع الحد الأدنى العام للأجور وكذلك الحد الأدنى لأجور المهن في جميع القطاعات بما فيها القطاع الخاص والتعاوني والمشترك بمقدار 25%.