Weekly information and analysis bulletin specialized in Arab Middle Eastern affairs prepared by neworientnews.com

Editor in chief Wassim Raad

 

New Orient Center for Strategic policies

___________________________________________________________________________

The strategic equation of Bashar al-Assad

By Ghaleb Kandil

The views of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the interview he gave to al-Manar television provide a framework for a new strategic period, not only in Syria but in the wider region. They illustrate decisive changes in the balance of power between the axis of the resistance, and the colonial-Zionist alliance and its tools.

President Assad said that the change in mood of the population and the loss of favorable environment by the terrorist groups, enabled the Syrian Arab army to take the offensive to regain control of many areas. This trend began several months ago and has strengthened after the Syrian people had discovered the true face of armed groups: they are dominated by takfiris currents; they commit horrible crimes; they are organically linked to the Israelis. The majority of Syrians understood that their country is the target of a foreign invasion. This new attitude of the population has allowed the army to launch a general offensive.

In his interview, the Syrian leader has set new equations based on the principle of a strong Syria, built around four concepts: 1-Syrian national state is determined to face and respond to any new Israeli aggression; 2-The strength of Syrian deterrence is strengthened after the delivery of new Russian weapons, despite western pressures; 3-The beginning of the emergence of a Syrian Popular Resistance for the Liberation of the Golan; 4-Strengthening the strategic partnership with the Lebanese resistance. Its participation in combat is a part of its role in the fight against the Israeli-takfiri alliance.

Assad also reiterated his vision of the political solution, based on the popular will and the election results, announcing that any agreement reached in any negotiations will be submitted to a referendum. He also explained in detail the structure of such opposition, composed of heterogeneous groups linked to foreign powers. With great serenity, he assured that the decision to run for presidency in 2014 is related to the will of the people and not to external pressures and desires of Westerners.

The leadership of President Bashar al-Assad has an Arab and dimension. He represents, with the Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the symbol of Arab dignity.

March-14 and the West are responsible for the Parliament mandate extension

By Ghaleb Kandil

Extension of the Parliament mandate has been widely criticized, including by those who prepared it for months. This duplicity is part of the mentality of the Lebanese political class, who despises the public.

The main reason that led to the extension is the inability to agree on a consensual electoral law, despite seven months of negotiations inside and outside Parliament. It is clear that it is the United States that have prevented any compromise, as they are well aware that any law other than that of 1960 is likely to weaken the influence of the West in Lebanon. The U.S. Ambassador to Beirut Maura Connelly, has clearly expressed this position by summing its Lebanese “allies” to hold the elections on the basis of the 1960 law. Washington has forced the Lebanese Forces (LF) of Samir Geagea to withdraw their support for the Orthodox electoral project without even giving them the time and the opportunity to justify their shift to the Christian public. However, the Orthodox project would have permitted LF to expand the size of their parliamentary bloc. But this was at the expense of the Future Movement and the Progressive Socialist Party of Walid Jumblatt and not of the Free Patriotic Movement and its allies.

The second reason given for the mandate extension is the worrying security situation. This is the direct result of the presence in several Lebanese regions of extremist groups and takfiris, who have developed through the favorable environment provided by the Future Movement and its sectarian and religious speech. From North Lebanon to the Bekaa, entire areas were exempt from the authority of the state to install training camps for Syrian extremists and international jihadists. Shebaa, Wadi Khaled, Akkar, Ersal, Tripoli, all regions transformed in a Syrian rebel backyard. In these circumstances, it was difficult to hold free elections.

Therefore, the 14-Mars and its regional and international sponsors assume full responsibility for the prorogation of Parliament and upset the timing of democratic maturity.

______________________________________________________________

Statements

Bashar al-Assad, Syrian president

«Russia’s weapons shipments are not linked to the Syria conflict. We have been negotiating with them about different types of weapons for years and Russia is committed to Syria to implement these contracts. All we have agreed on with Russia will be implemented and some of it has been implemented recently, and we and the Russians continue to implement these contracts. Any agreement between the state and the opposition would be subject to a referendum. If they want to talk about these matters, they will be presented during the conference, and when and if we reach an agreement, we will put it to a referendum to see what the reaction of the Syrian people is. I will contest the 2014 leadership election if the Syrian people want me to (…) Why is Hezbollah on the border inside Lebanon or Syria? Because the battle is a battle with the Israeli enemy or its agents in Syria and Lebanon,” he told Al-Manar.»

Omran Zohbi, Syrian Information minister

«The demands of the Turkish people don’t deserve all this violence. If Erdogan is unable to pursue non-violent means, he should resign. Erdogan’s repression of peaceful protest shows how detached he is from reality.»

Samir Geagea, Lebanese Forces leader

«The only one who can create a balance of power between Israel and Lebanon is the Lebanese army. But it is Hezbollah that prevents the military to assume its function. I recognized that the party received tactical advantages over Israel and has valiant fighters. But he has no right to claim that it was he who forced Israel to withdraw from Beirut. This is not true. Everyone knows that it is the May 17 agreement that led Israel to withdraw. And what is this victory in July 2006 which he speaks, which cost us more than a thousand deaths and billions of dollars in property damage? That without the presence of Hezbollah, Israel has invaded Lebanon, it is fooling the Lebanese.»

Walid Sukkariye, MP, Hezbollah bloc

«Those who attacked the Lebanese army in Ersal want the region to be empty of any presence of the State so that they can send weapons to Syria. Front al-Nosra is able, if willing, to commit acts of sabotage in Lebanon. The behavior of the State with the issue of Syrian refugees was very negative. Government allowed them to settle over the entire territory. In this way, al-Nosra can seep in Lebanon.»

___________________________________________________________

Events

______________________________________________________________

Press review

As Safir (Lebanese daily, Arab nationalist, May 31, 2013)

Mohammad Ballout, Paris

At his hearing before the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the National Assembly, the head of French diplomacy, Laurent Fabius, sent a compliment half fig half grape toward Mohammad Raad, head of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, that he described as “experienced diplomat.” MP Alain Marsaud has, meanwhile, returned the words of the Lebanese Parliamentary for him during their recent meeting in Beirut: “We have the same enemy, who is Al-Qaeda. Instead of putting Hezbollah on the list of terrorist organizations, come to ally with us.”

As Safir (May 28, 2013)

Imad Marmal

The information show that extremist groups in Syria planned to establish a “border belt” under their total control, enjoying a geographical depth to Ersal and Wadi Khaled, after taking control of Lebanese villages in the countryside of Qoussair, pushing their inhabitants to flee. This would have led to the closure of the land passage to Homs and would put all the Lebanese Bekaa under takfiris control.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah carefully observed attempts by armed groups to take control of the Damascus airport and the road that leads to it, followed by Israeli raids on the capital and its environs with the stated aim of cutting the resistance supply in Lebanon.
By linking these information, Hezbollah came to pick up the pieces of the offensive plan to gradually tighten the noose around the resistance, controlling air and ground supply lines.

At this stage, Hezbollah realized that hesitation became useless and had to move from reaction to action. He entered the battle in Qoussair as a “preventive confrontation”, in cooperation and coordination with the Syrian army.

For Hezbollah, it is not a commitment linked to the person of President Bashar al-Assad but strategic choices regarding the conflict with Israel. Resistance must support the regime that defends these strategic options, whatever the name of the one who leads.

Furthermore, some believe that by engaging in Qoussair, Hezbollah defends the political future of Saad Hariri that will be among the biggest losers in the case of takfiris victory and their control of the Islamic scene in Syria and Lebanon.

Ad Diyar (Lebanese Daily close to March-8 coalition)

(May 31, 2013)

The intensity of the fighting increased in Qoussair because more than 11,000 Islamist extremists, including 2,000 Lebanese from Tripoli, arrived in the city to face the loyalist troops. Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri has offered $ 150 million from the Gulf to the Syrian armed opposition, which is currently dominated by the Nosra Front. It’s Hariri who offered money, because Gulf States do not want to take direct responsibility to support this organization included on the terrorist list of the United Nations. In addition, bank transfers do not come directly from the accounts of Hariri but names of family members Bsat, Itani and Baba.

Al Akhbar (Lebanese Daily close to the Lebanese Resistance, May 31, 2013)

Radwan Mortada

On the road to Damascus, past the military checkpoints and Syrian flags – of the government variety – one can spot columns of smoke rising from the horizon.

Yet before we officially enter Syrian territory, we must first cross into “No Man’s Land,” a strip of territory that exists in limbo between the Lebanese and Syrian borders. Here, a soldier propositions a Lebanese taxi driver: He won’t search his car if the driver gives him a chicken. Instead, the driver hands him 200 Syrian pounds, about two dollars, prompting the soldier to walk away, muttering unintelligibly.

Between Masnaa and Mazzeh, it is a different story. There, one would have already entered Syrian territory and have passed through eight checkpoints. Soldiers here thoroughly search all passing cars and double check passengers’ identities. Those passing through the so-called military lane are sometimes spared.

Inside Damascus, some estimate there are more than two thousand checkpoints, giving the city the feel of a huge garrison. While there’s no exact number, a couple thousand seems plausible since every corner hosts a checkpoint manned by a handful of soldiers. One man warned that if “entering Damascus is nearly impossible, then leaving it is beyond impossible.”

 

We inquired about reports of militants seizing checkpoints during clashes west of Maliki, Bab Touma, and other districts of Damascus. Our escort confirmed the reports, but maintained that the perpetrators were either caught or would be caught soon.

 

“These incidents have caused tension and panic among the civilian population,” he says, then quickly affirms that the attacks stopped “more than two months ago, after the security service eliminated most of the sleeper cells.”

 

At night, Damascus does not resemble its daytime self. Its rhythm slows down, though not to a complete stop. Coffee houses still teem with nighttime activity, its mostly male clientele convening for conversation.

 

On the way to Kfar Souseh, there are more hints of death as this area continues to witness some of the conflict’s fiercest clashes. Hamra Street, once dubbed “the beating heart of Damascus,” falls into a deafening silence at night. As for the Airport Road, our escort warns us to avoid this “Highway of Death” at all costs. It’s under a constant barrage of sniper fire.

 

Of Midan, a stronghold of the revolution in the beginning, our escort describes it as an area where “the merchants would slaughter camels to honor the president, but overnight, people here turned against him.”

 

Small details emerge during the course of the trip, like, not all the rumors of soaring prices are true. And one of the more noticeable facts of life is how many people are glued to TV sets, watching Arab Idol and soccer matches. Rarely do we find a restaurant with a TV broadcasting the news. We ask one restaurant manager to switch over to the news, but he declined. It was best to “avoid provoking anyone.”

 

Nonetheless, our escort says that when Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah makes a speech, the Damascus sky lights up with bullets. Most of the shooting is at the hands of “the men stationed at the checkpoints.”

 

In the countryside, the security situation is different. The Syrian army has not yet regained control of many areas and clashes continue. The area of Basateen al-Barzeh has witnessed fierce fighting between opposition militants and the army. There is one story of a Syrian army officer whose arm had to be amputated during the battle. Once he was all stitched up, he quickly returned to the battlefield.

 

The battle here has become personal, yet this officer’s motivation is the exception, not the rule, as many Syrian officers have sold themselves to the highest bidder.

 

Our escort says, “We are defending the chief and Syria. They are more precious than our own lives.” The “chief” is none other than President Assad. According to the escort, the officer of the previous story had also been shot in the foot in a battle in Daria. In this version of the story, he had to be forcibly dragged from the battlefield.

 

Al Akhbar (May 31, 2013)

Ghassan Saoud

 

Lebanon’s dominant Christian party, the Free Patriotic Movement, led by General Michel Aoun, has made a habit of dressing up their failure as if it were a victory.

Even in the face of Aoun’s worst setbacks, like being exiled by the Syrian army, he has managed to portray himself as the victor, a man who stood up for his country and his principles against tremendous odds.

 

And again, during the 2005 parliamentary elections, Aoun spun the poor showing he suffered in some districts into a victory for his Free Patriotic Movement (FPM). The intent here, of course, was to lift his supporters’ morale, but the method was always to blame others for the party’s shortcomings.

In 1990, he blamed his bitter rivals in the Lebanese Forces for surrendering to the Taif Agreement, and consequently Syrian control of Lebanon. In 2005, he was able to lay it at the feet of the quartet alliance that was formed to contain his growing influence.

 

Today, Aounists everywhere are celebrating despite the fact that they lost the electoral law battle that they staked so much on. Parliament has now postponed the elections for 17 months, yet another blow to the FPM, which strongly opposes such a step.

 

It is true that by standing firm on the Orthodox Gathering electoral law, the general’s party has gained much credibility among Christian voters. Recent public opinion polls have indicated as much, showing a marked increase in the FPM’s popularity.

 

Nevertheless, some Aounists are less than optimistic about the challenging period ahead. For one, given the postponement of the elections for over a year, the party may not be able to benefit from the lead that it enjoys today.

 

Party pessimists are also worried about their solid and strategic alliance with Hezbollah, who they feel has not backed the FPM enough on critical matters.

 

Some Aounists suspect that Hezbollah and Amal were behind the resignation of the Najib Mikati government and the naming of Tammam Salam as prime minister-designate. They also blame Hezbollah for not exerting enough pressure on their ally, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, for putting the Orthodox law up before a vote in parliament.

 

The two allies are also at odds today over priorities, with Hezbollah insisting that the decisive battle is taking place in Syria, while the FPM places local Lebanese issues at the fore of their agenda.

The Aounists concede that the Syrian crisis has a lot of bearing on what happens in their country, but they remind Hezbollah that even after the Resistance scored one of its greatest victories over Israel in 2006, it was unable to translate it positively on the ground in Lebanon, because it underestimated the importance of the internal front.

 

Unfortunately, the February 2008 memorandum of understanding between the two parties, which represents the cornerstone of their enduring alliance, does not stipulate agreement on conducting elections on time.

 

This has led some Aounists to go so far as to criticize their ally over its involvement in the Syria and, in turn, go along with efforts to delay the Lebanese parliamentary elections.

 

Finally, the growing differences between the two parties has led to a loosening of Aoun’s parliamentary bloc, which includes two other Christian parties: the Armenian Dashnak and Suleiman Franjieh’s Marada Party, both of which indicated that they will support the extension of parliament in today’s session, which FPM MPs plan to boycott completely.

 

Al Akhbar (May 27, 2013)

Ibrahim al-Amin

 

Relations between the Bashar al-Assad regime in Damascus and the Lebanese Resistance had already reached a high-level of coordination and mutual support even before the outbreak of the Syrian crisis. At the time, the two allies tended to respect each others’ boundaries, recognizing each other’s key roles in the region.

 

The onset of the Syrian crisis only served to further intertwine their interests as both became targets of the Syrian opposition and their regional and international backers.

In the early stages of the uprising, Hezbollah tried to play the role of mediator, seeking ways to open up channels between the regime and the opposition. But quickly, developments – like Israel’s growing involvement in the crisis – prompted a qualitative change in the relationship between Damascus and the Lebanese Resistance.

 

Assad’s response to the latest Israeli attacks on Damascus would have not meant much if it did not also have the strong support of Hezbollah, Iran, and even Russia – with the Resistance openly declaring its willingness to take part in any effort to ward off Tel Aviv’s threats.

 

Although Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah justified in detail his party’s involvement in Syria, he did not mention – for his own reasons – that the role of the Resistance in Syria’s internal front is not without its limits, and largely depends on the course of events there.

 

The party has already declared that one of its goals is to push those forces that pose a threat to the Resistance away from Syrian areas adjacent to the Lebanese border. However, when it comes to confrontation with Israel, we can expect an increased and ongoing role for Hezbollah, particularly in the occupied Golan Heights.

 

Price of Involvement

 

As for the price that Hezbollah is likely to pay for its involvement, the two rockets that struck southern Beirut on Sunday morning are but a sign that there are those preparing for a campaign of terror against the Resistance.

 

It is difficult to foresee the trajectory of events after Nasrallah’s call to arms alongside the Syrian regime, but early signs suggest that the coming period will be one of heightened tensions among Lebanon’s political forces, particularly as the dream of toppling Assad is slowly fading away.

This could lead Hezbollah’s Lebanese opponents to exploit mounting sectarian tensions, particularly in Sidon and Tripoli, in order to turn up the pressure on the Resistance and its popular base.

The concern here is that the country’s internal security services have shown themselves to be completely ineffective in diffusing Tripoli’s interminable sectarian violence. So what if it is discovered that the Future Movement, and those powers behind them, hold sway over the state’s internal security forces.

 

Finally, I invite everyone to take a different approach to the crisis facing our region: To the extent that the Americans, Europeans, and those Arabs in their service succeed in reviving the colonial legacy of division and warfare among the Arabs, this will automatically raise the question of different kind of unity for the other side, which could lead to surprising results that no one could have expected.

 

Let us dream and hope!

 

World Tribune (American Daily, May 31, 2013)

 

After two years of civil war, support for the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad was said to have sharply increased. NATO has been studying data that told of a sharp rise in support for Assad. The data, compiled by Western-sponsored activists and organizations, showed that a majority of Syrians were alarmed by the Al Qaida takeover of the Sunni revolt and preferred to return to Assad. “The people are sick of the war and hate the jihadists more than Assad,” a Western source familiar with the data said. “Assad is winning the war mostly because the people are cooperating with him against the rebels.”

 

The data, relayed to NATO over the last month, asserted that 70 percent of Syrians support the Assad regime. Another 20 percent were deemed neutral and the remaining 10 percent expressed support for the rebels.

 

The sources said no formal polling was taken in Syria, racked by two years of civil war in which 90,000 people were reported killed. They said the data came from a range of activists and independent organizations that were working in Syria, particularly in relief efforts.

 

The data was relayed to NATO as the Western alliance has been divided over whether to intervene in Syria. Britain and France were said to have been preparing to send weapons to the rebels while the United States was focusing on protecting Syria’s southern neighbor Jordan.

 

A report to NATO said Syrians have undergone a change of heart over the last six months. The change was seen most in the majority Sunni community, which was long thought to have supported the revolt. “The Sunnis have no love for Assad, but the great majority of the community is withdrawing from the revolt,” the source said. “What is left is the foreign fighters who are sponsored by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. They are seen by the Sunnis as far worse than Assad.”

 

The Jerusalem Post (Israeli daily, May 31, 2013)

 

The head of aircraft maker MiG said on Friday that Russia was counting on providing Syria with 10 MiG-29 fighter planes and was discussing details with a Syrian delegation, RIA news agency reported. It did not say when they might be delivered.

 

Meanwhile, there were contradicting reports in Russia on when Moscow is scheduled to deliver the the S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria.

 

Two Russian newspapers,Vedomosti and Kommersant, cited different sources as saying the weapons delivery is not expected before next year, rejecting claims the missiles had already been transferred to the regime of President Bashar Assad, according to AFP.

 

The Vedomosti cited a Russia defense source as saying it was unclear if the weapons would be delivered to Syria this year, while the Kommersant quoted a source as saying the delivery was only planned for the second quarter of 2014.

 

In a separate report on Russian news agency Interfax, a Russian arms industry source said Moscow is unlikely to deliver the missiles before the fall of 2013.

 

The source suggested the delivery could be accelerated if neighboring countries carried out air attacks on Syria or if a no-fly regime were to be imposed on the country.

 

“Regarding the deliveries of the S-300, they can begin no earlier than the autumn. Technically it’s possible, but much will depend on how the situation develops in the region and the position of Western countries,” said the source, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The Wall Street Journal (American daily, June 1, 2013)

 

 

Emre Peker and Ayla Albayrak

 

Turkish antigovernment demonstrations widened Saturday as more than 100,000 protesters took to the streets in cities across the country, forcing Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to withdraw riot police from Istanbul’s landmark Taksim Square.

 

But the prime minister, making his first comments on the protest since Wednesday, also struck a defiant tone, labeling his detractors “a minority,” and calling on them to cease the protests. Tens of thousands of people began gathering in areas around Istanbul’s central Taksim Square from sunrise on Saturday, while smaller copycat protests emerged in several other Turkish cities, including the capital Ankara, and Izmir. The protests, which began as a smaller campaign to save a downtown park, have evolved into a broader demonstration against Mr. Erdogan’s government. The numbers of injured in Friday’s clashes in Istanbul climbed sharply overnight to around 1,000, according to volunteer doctors and nurses. 

 

Mr. Erdogan took a largely uncompromising stance, claiming that his party’s support easily eclipsed the numbers attending antigovernment demonstrations. “Don’t compete with us…. If you gather 200,000 people, I can gather a million…. This event has been escalated beyond the park and become ideological,” Mr. Erdogan said of the protests, which intensified dramatically on Friday. “The police were there yesterday, they are there today, and will be there tomorrow because Taksim cannot be a square where extremists run wild.” 

 

Despite the gathering protests, the ruling AKP, with roots in Islamists politics, still retains strong public support. Mr. Erdogan won the latest of his three election victories in 2011 after delivering strong economic growth and political stability. Mr. Erdogan brooks little dissent and has made no secret of his ambition to run for Turkey’s presidency in elections next year, when his term as prime minister ends, to the dismay of the political opposition.

 

As the protest numbers swelled, other senior government officials weighed in to damp tensions, with President Abdullah Gul stressing in a statement that police should exercise more restraint and calling on protesters to act “in a mature way” to avoid escalation. 

 

Police, Protesters Clash in Turkey

 

Early on Saturday evening, battalions of riot police withdrew from the square, although security forces continued to use tear gas and high-pressure water against protesters in adjacent areas.

Once inside the Square, the crowd were greeted by the detritus of the previous night’s clashes, including broken glass, garbage and a torched police vehicle. Hundreds of policemen, still present in the morning, were not to be seen.

 

Mr. Erdogan also conceded that the riot police may have resorted to excessive force in recent days, but his remarks appeared to have done little to soothe the tensions on the streets. Some residents in Istanbul neighborhoods banged pots and pans in protest as the prime minister spoke, while the main opposition Republican People’s Party canceled a demonstration, instead calling on supporters to join protesters around Taksim. Thousands of Istanbul residents have been flocking to neighborhoods where demonstrations are concentrated all day, with waves crossing the Bosphorus Bridge on foot and coordinating over social-media platforms like Twitter to identify the best routes.

 

The profile of many of the protesters appeared dramatically different from Turkey’s more familiar demonstrations, which pitted leftists or nationalists against the police. “I’m taking part in a rally for the first me in my life. I had to take some precautions, my medicine, and snacks. God willing nothing bad will happen,” said Nazmiye Coruh, 50, a retired PR manager, who was equipped with a surgical mask.

 

“It feels great to throw out all the stress and anger,” she said. 

 

The public outcry follows a series of events that have fed antigovernment sentiment among many Turks, particularly in large cities. Recent episodes include street-fighting between unions and police on May Day, a restriction on alcohol sales that secularist Turks say is social engineering, Ankara’s increasingly aggressive stance on the Syria conflict and urban planning in Istanbul such as a new airport and a new bridge over the Bosphorus that environmentalist say will uproot thousands of trees.

“We want to show that we are afraid of not being able to continue our lifestyles under this government,” said Deniz, 29, a computer engineer demonstrating around Taksim, who preferred not to provide his last name.

 

The protests were triggered by a smaller campaign to protect Gezi Park at Taksim Square, a small and rare patch of green space in central Istanbul which the government wants to raze to build a multipurpose building modeled after a historic Ottoman barracks. An administrative court on Friday ruled to halt construction at the park, providing a brief, if temporary, win for the protesters seeking to preserve the park. In the past five days, demonstrations have gained more steam and attracted a broader swath of the population with each heavy-handed police response that helped turned the event into an antigovernment rally.

 

As protesters continued to move toward Taksim Square, many reported that social-networking sites, which demonstrators have used to organize gatherings, were interrupted or not functioning. Turkey’s telecoms regulator said in a statement that any disruption was due to heavy traffic, rather than a government intervention, which would require a court order. 

 

 Mr. Erdogan’s remarks on Saturday showed little sign that he would succumb to protesters’ demands to abandon government construction projects, let alone resign. The premier also said that a cultural center at Taksim Square named after modern Turkey’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, should be replaced with an opera house, further inflaming tensions with secularist Turks devoted to the country’s first president.

 

 ”When we had these projects drafted, we said this barracks will seriously enrich Taksim Square,” Mr. Erdogan said. “This place, at this time, should be an important center.”