Christianity Through Jewish Eyes

Home » Levitt Letter » Levitt Letter Extra News

Important articles that didn't make the Levitt Letter

Archive for the ‘News’ Category

Mullahs Put Kids at Frontline of Terrorism

Sunday, February 19th, 2012

By Laura King, www.LATimes.com

Six months ago, in a moving ceremony held during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, President Hamid Karzai went on Afghanistan television to pardon two dozen boys, the youngest only 8 years old, who had been caught trying to carry out suicide attacks.

In mid-February, authorities in Kandahar province reported that two of the children, 10-year-olds, had been rearrested last week, apparently intending again to carry out bombings.

Provincial spokesman Zalmay Ayubi said that the boys each had a vest full of explosives when they were detained along with three adult militant suspects, and that they told intelligence officers they had been recruited for suicide missions.

A statement from provincial authorities in Kandahar quoted one of the boys, who was named Azizullah, as saying the pair had undergone training at a madrassa, or religious school, in Pakistan. The mullahs told them that the boys would be unharmed by the blast when they set off their bombs, Azizullah reportedly said.

The other child, called Nasibullah, told authorities he had been taught how to detonate a vest full of explosives. “They showed me how to press the button in my hand,” he said, according to the statement issued by the provincial government. The intelligence service said that one of the boys was from Pakistan’s Baluchistan province, across the border from southern Afghanistan, and that the other was from Afghanistan’s Paktia province, which borders Pakistan’s tribal areas.

During the emotional televised pardon of the would-be bombers in August, Karzai was shown talking with the boys about their experiences. Before the pardon, the youngsters had been held in a juvenile detention center in the capital.

The children told Karzai of having been told to try to approach foreign troops and set off their explosion and of receiving drugs beforehand, which they were told was medicine to make them strong.

Authorities in Kandahar said the rearrested boys expressed regret and said they hoped they would be pardoned again.

Human rights groups have strongly denounced the use of children in attacks, and at least a dozen such incidents have been documented in recent years.

A spokesman for the NATO force, Lt. Col. Jimmie Cummings, said the coalition is “outraged by the Taliban’s continued use of children” as potential suicide bombers.

Karzai’s office said an investigation had been launched to find out how the two boys were induced to again attempt suicide bombings, and that it was hoped they could be given an education and retraining. Officials at the Kabul juvenile detention center said at the time of the mass pardon that the boys had been brainwashed and that it was difficult to make them see that their actions were wrong.

Mormons Apologize for Posthumous Baptism of Jews

Friday, February 17th, 2012

By Jennifer Dobner Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY (Feb. 14, 2012) – Mormon church leaders apologized to the family of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal after his parents were posthumously baptized, a controversial ritual that Mormons believe allows deceased people a way to the afterlife but offends members of many other religions.

Wiesenthal died in 2005 after surviving the Nazi death camps and spending his life documenting Holocaust crimes and hunting down perpetrators who remained at large. Jews are particularly offended by an attempt to alter the religion of Holocaust victims, who were murdered because of their religion, and the baptism of Holocaust survivors was supposed to have been barred by a 1995 agreement.

Yet records indicate Wiesenthal’s parents, Asher and Rosa Rapp Wiesenthal, were baptized in proxy ceremonies performed by Mormon church members at temples in Arizona and Utah in late January.

In a statement, the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center denounced the baptismal rites.

“We are outraged that such insensitive actions continue in the Mormon temples,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean at the center.

The church immediately apologized, saying it was the actions of an individual member of church – whom they did not name – that led to the submission of Wiesenthal’s name.

“We sincerely regret that the actions of an individual member of the church led to the inappropriate submission of these names,” Michael Purdy, a spokesman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said in a statement issued Monday. “We consider this a serious breach of our protocol and we have suspended indefinitely this person’s ability to access our genealogy records.”

(Ronald Zak, File/Associated Press) - FILE-- This 1995 file photo shows Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal. Mormon church leaders have apologized to the family of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal after his parents were posthumously baptized in a Mormon temple ritual last month.

Mormons believe posthumous baptism by proxy allows deceased persons to receive the Gospel in the afterlife. The church believes departed souls can then accept or reject the baptismal rites and contends the offerings are not intended to offend anyone.

Other religions, including the Catholic church, have also publicly objected to the baptism of its members, and it’s been widely reported that Mormon and GOP presidential nominee front-runner Mitt Romney’s atheist father-in-law Edward Davies was posthumously baptized.

A check of the records by Salt Lake City researcher Helen Radkey showed the baptism occurred in November 1993. The record suggests a family member may have submitted Davies’s name, which would be in line with the rules for entering names in the database.

Changes made to the church database in 2010 were intended to better prevent names of Holocaust victims from being submitted for rites.

Radkey found documentation of the baptism of the Wiesenthals last week while conducting regular checks of a church database. Jews have relied on the work of Radkey, a former Mormon, since 1999, although Mormon church officials have publicly questioned her motives for reviewing the database.

On Tuesday she told The Associated Press she periodically checks the database for the Wiesenthal name to gauge whether the latest Mormon efforts to screen the process were working.

Radkey’s recent monitoring also turned up a record for Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel and several of his relatives.

“None of the three names were submitted for baptism and they would not have been under the church’s guidelines and procedures,” Purdy said. “The names were simply entered into a genealogical database. Submission for proxy baptism is a separate process.”

New Jersey-based Jewish genealogy experts Gary Mokotoff said publicity about the Wiesenthal baptism will help solve the problem, which he believes is likely limited to a small number of overzealous church members who believe they are providing a service to their church.

“If the word gets out that there are consequences, they’ll stop,” said Mokotoff, who has also participated in talks with Mormon leaders. “But no one has a right to involve other person’s families in their religion. That’s basically what’s wrong about the whole concept.”

Iran turns to India for wheat as palm oil dries up

Tuesday, February 14th, 2012

By Matthias Williams and Manoj Kumar

(Reuters) – Iran has turned to India for wheat supplies as other sellers divert grain cargoes away from the Middle East country because of sanctions-related payments problems that have caused palm oil imports to grind to a halt.

Indian tea was also added on Thursday, Feb 9, to a growing list of Iran’s food imports that are being disrupted by U.S. and European Union sanctions aimed at forcing Tehran to scrap a suspected nuclear weapons programme.

India’s Trade Secretary Rahul Khullar said a private Iranian buyer is interested in importing “a very large quantity” of wheat, which the world’s second-biggest producer of the crop has in surplus.

Khullar, the most senior official in the ministry, suggested India was considering the sale. India wants to step up exports to Iran in a range of goods to settle part of its oil due to Tehran.

“There are UN sanctions which India honours, those don’t cover the export of vast range of products which India can export to Iran,” Khullar told reporters.

“If the EU and the U.S. both want to stop exports to that country, please tell me why I should follow suit? Why shouldn’t I take up that business opportunity?”

“If Europe and the U.S. believe they wish to sanction exports of a large number of items to that country that is their choice. But for us we shall continue business,” the trade secretary said.

In recent days more evidence has emerged showing that Iran is having problems buying rice, cooking oil, and other staples for its 74 million population.

U.S. financial sanctions imposed since the beginning of this year and targeted at Iran’s central bank are playing havoc with the OPEC producer’s ability to buy imports and receive payment for its oil exports, commodities traders said.

Trading sources said that Singaporean firms have stopped supplying Iran with Indonesian palm oil on concerns over the country’s ability to make payments, a day after traders said Malaysian exporters had taken a similar action.

Indonesia and Malaysia account for 90 percent of the global production of palm oil. Most deals for Indonesian palm oil are conducted in Singapore.

“I can confirm that Singaporean firms have stopped. We don’t want to go anywhere near Iran at this moment, it is too risky,” said a trader with a listed Singaporean firm that ships Indonesian palm oil cargoes to the Middle East and Iran.

A trading source from Saudi Arabia whose firm runs a 16,000 tonne a year edible oils refinery in Iran said the refining sector was barely operating.

The halt in palm oil supplies comes on top of Iranian payment problems for Indian rice and European grain to Iran.

Iran imports around 4.5 million tonnes of grain a year, including about 3.5 million tonnes of maize, which is mainly used in animal feed.

It relies on imports to meet more than 60 percent of its maize needs, about 45 percent of its rice demand but only 3 percent of its wheat, figures from the U.S. Department of Agriculture showed for 2010-11.

However, wheat could be used by Iran to replace maize as animal feed, which may explain the approach to India, especially after news last week that Ukrainian maize shipments had been cut in half.

India is expected to harvest a record 88.31 million tonnes of wheat in 2012, while government stocks on January 1 stood at 25.7 million tonnes, more than three times the official target for the quarter ending March 31.

Khullar said Indian tea exports to Iran face payment problems as well. India exported more than 15 million kilograms of tea to Iran worth over $50 million, India state-run Tea Board figures show.

That adds to news that Iran had defaulted on rice payments worth $144 million.

“There were just handful, or a clutch of rice payments which are stuck … more important than the rice payment is the tea payment,” Khullar said.

“Private traders are not dumb. They stop exports when the payment system run into trouble. The actual shipments of rice to Iran are much lower than they had been in previous years,” Khullar said referring to rice exports.

“There are a handful of guys … who have actually exported, whose payment settlement has got stuck in transit.”

While some Asian buyers have cut crude imports from Iran due to payment issues, the sanctions have prompted a plunge in the rial and raised costs of imports for Tehran. The sanctions have also made it more difficult for Dubai-based middlemen to process payments.

Israeli Commercial Ridiculing Veil Angers Muslims – video

Monday, February 13th, 2012

A senior lawmaker says Iran is considering a plan to cut off the country’s economic transactions with South Korea’s Samsung. This commercial is from an Israeli cable company offering new subscribers a Samsung Tablet with apps. The Mossad agents in disguise (veils), arrive at the Isfahan nuclear facility and meet up with another Mossad agent who shows them his new Tablet with apps. When one of them pushes the wrong app, the nuclear facility in the distance explodes.

Video sound: The sound doesn’t kick in until the actual ad begins at 0:50.

A comment on the YouTube website protests with this explanation: “The bug is nicknamed khumeni (NOT Khomeini). Its nickname derives from the Hebrew word ‘khum’, which means ‘brown’. Its similarity to the Iranian name Khomeini is a mere coincidence.” The explanation doesn’t detract from the humor at the end as an agent swats a buzzing khumeni.

Israel Boosts Naval Forces in Natural Gas Fields

Saturday, February 11th, 2012

www.upi.com/Business_News

TEL AVIV, Israel, (UPI) — The Israeli government plans to build a floating liquefied natural gas terminal with a sea-based defense radar system off its Mediterranean coast while forming a naval force to protect its rich offshore gas fields against terrorist attack.

The terminal, which is scheduled to pump 87.25 billion cubic feet of imported gas into Israel’s energy network annually, is intended as a stopgap until the Jewish state’s new fields go on-stream in 2013 at the earliest.

The new fields, Leviathan and the smaller Tamar field, hold an estimated 25 trillion cubic feet of gas. Major new strikes are expected as Noble Energy Co., which has its headquarters in Texas, and its Israelis partners, extend exploration.

The U.S. Geological Survey reported that the Levant Basin–which covers Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Cyprus, and the Gaza Strip–contains around 122 tcf of gas and at least 1.7 billion barrels of oil.

Israel’s big finds, which are likely to extend into Cypriot and Lebanese waters, significantly alter the strategic energy picture in the eastern Mediterranean.

Given the region’s history of war — the Arab-Israeli conflict and the historical Greece-Turkey rivalry which resulted in the 1974 division of Cyprus — there are fears this abundance of energy wealth could trigger new battles.

Lebanon, with which Israel is technically at war — they clashed in a 34-day war in the summer of 2006 — claims Israel’s Leviathan field extends into Lebanese waters.

Israel’s plans to defend its gas fields reflects its concerns that they are highly vulnerable to attack by terrorists using anti-ship missiles, frogmen, or suicide bombers in boats packed with explosives.

In this regard, the main worry is the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, which Israel’s military says possess 42,000 missiles and rockets, including Chinese-designed C-802 anti-ship missiles that seriously damaged an Israeli corvette in the 2006 fighting.

Syria recently took delivery of 72 supersonic Russian-built P-800 Yakhont anti-ship missiles with a range of 190 miles and powerful enough to sink a large ship. Israeli leaders say they fears these could possibly be passed on to Hezbollah for use against the Israeli gas production platforms.

On top of that, in 2011 the Israeli navy seized an Iranian arms shipment, including six Nasr-1 radar-guided anti-ship missiles it claimed was bound for the Palestinian Hamas organization in Gaza.

Military commanders say the production platforms and associated installations will be prime targets if a new Middle East war erupts between Iran and the West currently confronting each other in the Persian Gulf.

Concerns have been heightened by a recent foray into the eastern Mediterranean by the Iranian navy. Two vessels transited the Suez Canal to visit the Syrian port of Tartus in Iran’s first naval mission into those waters since the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Tehran has said it plans to deploy warships in the Mediterranean on a more regular basis. Most of the Israeli navy is deployed in those waters.

The strategic importance of the gas fields, which are expected to transform Israel’s economy and earn it billions of dollars in energy exports, is underlined by the plan to strengthen the navy at a time when the hard-pressed government is slashing the defense budget.

No details of the cost of the naval program have been disclosed. But The Jerusalem Post said some of it will be underwritten by state-owned companies tasked with constructing and operating the sea-based LNG facility several miles off the northern city of Hadera.

Up to now, Israel has been importing gas from neighboring Egypt, with which it signed a landmark peace treaty in 1979, supplementing gas from Israel’s only working gas field that’s nearly depleted.

The Egyptian gas supplies are problematical. The gas pipeline across the Sinai Peninsula has been attacked 12 times since the uprising in Egypt that erupted in January 2011. The latest bombing Sunday ruptured the line again.

Israel imported 43 percent of its gas from Egypt and that’s now been largely cut off. But that’s just half the problem.

The interim government in Cairo, installed after President Hosni Mubarak was driven from office Feb. 11, 2011, claims the fees for the gas were far too low. It wants hefty increases.

Israel’s reluctant to agree to that even though the Tamar field isn’t expected to begin production until 2013 at the earliest.

New U.S. sanctions on Iran aim to head off Israel

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012

By Anne Gearan AP National Security Writer

WASHINGTON – Additional U.S. sanctions on Iran are more significant for their timing than their immediate effect on Iran’s economy, coming as the United States and its allies are arguing that Israel should hold off on any military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities to allow more time for sanctions to work.

The U.S. ordered tough new penalties Monday to give U.S. banks additional powers to freeze assets linked to the Iranian government and close loopholes that officials say Iran has used to move money despite earlier restrictions imposed by the U.S. and Europe.

Like previous economic penalties, these are intended to persuade Iran to back off what the West contends is a drive to build a nuclear bomb. Israel increasingly is concerned that sanctions will never be enough to make Iran drop what has become a national priority for a clerical regime that has vowed to wipe Israel off the map.

The faster and more effectively the sanctions can be seen to work, the better the case to shelve any plan by Israel to bomb Iran, a pre-emptory move that could ignite a new Mideast war. Taking this initial step against the Iranian Central Bank, the first time the U.S. has directly gone after that major institution, is one way the Obama administration can show momentum now.

Israeli officials have been open about their worry that Iran could be on the brink of a bomb by this summer and that this spring offers the last window of opportunity to destroy bomb-related facilities [before they go deep underground]. Many Israeli officials believe that sanctions only give Iran time to move its nuclear program underground, out of reach of Israeli military strikes.

Israel considers Iran to be its most dangerous enemy and has vowed to prevent it from going nuclear.

Israel’s hawkish foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, was in Washington this week and will meet with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday. He refused questions following a meeting on Capitol Hill on Monday, and an Israeli official in Jerusalem said the country’s prime minister has told Cabinet members not to be so outspoken about the possibility of attacking Iran.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing a closed meeting.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself often has commented about keeping all options on the table in dealing with Iran.

The new, stricter sanctions, authorized in legislation that President Barack Obama signed in December, will be enforced under an order he signed only now.

The U.S. and Europe want to deprive Iran of the oil income it needs to run its government and pay for the nuclear program. But many experts believe Iran will be able to find other buyers outside Europe.

The European Union announced last month it would ban the import of Iranian crude oil starting in July. The U.S. doesn’t buy Iranian oil, but last month it placed sanctions on Iran’s banks to make it harder for the nation to sell crude. The U.S., however, has delayed implementing those sanctions for at least six months because it is worried about sending oil prices higher at a time when the world economy is struggling. Iran exports about 3 percent of the world’s oil.

White House spokesman Jay Carney denied that Monday’s unexpected announcement of new banking sanctions was a sign of heightened worry about an Israeli attack.

“There has been a steady increase in our sanctions activity and this is part of that escalation,” he said.

Carney said U.S. sanctions on Iran already are squeezing Iran’s economy and have exacerbated tensions within the Iranian leadership.

“There is no question that the impact of the isolation on Iran and the economic sanctions on Iran have caused added turmoil within Iran,” he said.

Iran is the world’s third-largest exporter of crude oil, giving its leaders financial resources and leverage to withstand outside pressure. Last year, Iran generated $100 billion in revenue from oil, up from $20 billion a decade ago, according to IHS CERA, an energy consulting firm.

If Iranian oil is prevented from getting to market, other suppliers could make up the difference. The U.S. has been pressuring other Middle East and African nations to step up production for sale to Europe. Saudi Arabia has said it could increase production to make up for any lost Iranian crude.

Iran’s disputed nuclear program became a global concern more than five years ago, when the extent of the country’s research and uranium enrichment began to be known. Since then, a web of international economic and other sanctions have failed to stop Iran’s progress toward a point when it could build one or more nuclear devices.

U.S. intelligence agencies say Iran is indeed close to that ability but has not yet decided to go ahead. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and denounces sanctions as aggression.

The White House previously had said it would take months to evaluate the likely effect on the fragile global economy before taking the next large steps, including new penalties on the Central Bank.

Now, U.S. institutions are required to seize any Iranian state assets they come across, rather than rejecting the transaction involved.

The value of Iranian assets affected by the new order was not clear. Iran does almost no direct business with the United States after three decades of enmity, but its money moves through the world financial system and its oil is sold in dollars.

Syrian Embassies Under Siege

Sunday, February 5th, 2012

Leon Neal / AFP / Getty Images

Associated Press
www.TheDailyBeast.com

Protesters were so angry over Syria’s latest and most brutal crackdown on dissent—more than 200 people were killed in Homs over the weekend—and the failure of the United Nations to pass a resolution calling on President Bashir al-Assad to step down, that they attacked seven Syrian embassies all around the world Saturday. The embassy in Cairo was set on fire, and mobs trashed the diplomatic offices in London and Canberra, Australia. Similar scenes played out in Athens, Berlin, Kuwait, and Libya. Russia and China’s veto of the U.N. resolution has been called shameful, and the Syrian opposition said it amounts to providing the Assad regime a “license to kill.”

Lebanon’s Maronites: Bellwether of the Mideast’s Christians

Tuesday, January 24th, 2012

Lebanon’s Maronites, threatened by Sunni power, will be the bellwether of the Mideast’s Christians. Could they face the same fate as the region’s Jews?

By Lee Smith www.TabletMag.com

A statue of Saint John Maron, the first Patriarch of the Maronite community, north of Beirut, Lebanon. (Joseph Eid/AFP/Getty Images)

Being Christian in the Middle East has never been easy, but the wave of uprisings that has swept the region over the past year has made the situation for the region’s Christian minority almost unbearable. Violence against Egypt’s Coptic Christians—particularly church burnings, which have become routine—has gotten the most attention. But for the best bellwether of where things are headed, look to Lebanon’s Christians.

Lebanon’s Maronite community has long been the region’s Christian citadel. “It used to be that when Christians around the region looked at the situation in Lebanon, it cheered them,” Elie Fawaz, a Lebanese political analyst, told me this week in Beirut. “They saw that here the Christians were equal to their Muslim counterparts. They were citizens and had the same rights as Muslims.” The citadel is now tottering. If Lebanon once served as a beacon for the region’s other Christians, the dimming of this light is making Christians in unstable countries like Iraq, Syria, the Palestinian territories, and Egypt even more vulnerable.

Lebanon’s Christian community comprises up to a third of the country’s total population. It is made up largely of Maronites but also includes Greek Orthodox and a number of other sects, like Armenian Orthodox, Armenian Catholic, Greek Catholic, and Roman Catholic. Christians were likely never a majority in Lebanon, and yet, says Fawaz, a Greek Orthodox, “the Christians didn’t act like a minority. They pushed their vision for an independent and sovereign Lebanese state.”

Historically, Lebanese Christians have provided some of the region’s most influential intellectual leaders, like Charles Malik, who helped write the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Michel Chiha, one of the authors of Lebanon’s 1926 Constitution. In the wake of Lebanon’s independence in 1943, the Christian vision was to build a sovereign state that would bring political and cultural modernity to the country and, eventually, to the broader Middle East.

That project stalled for a number of reasons. First, there was the relative demographic decline of the Christians in the post-independence period, due to the accelerated birth rates of Sunnis and Shiites. The French authorities that oversaw Lebanon during the mandate period created a power-sharing agreement that allotted Christians 50 percent of the parliament—the other 50 percent was split between Shia and Sunnis—and this struck Lebanon’s growing Muslim population as unfair. Most significantly, in addition to these domestic problems, the Christians were unable to protect Lebanon from the region’s furies, which culminated in the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990) that pitted a number of different domestic players, as well as regional and international actors, against one another.

One of the main causes of that 15-year conflagration was the support of Lebanese Sunnis for the Palestinian cause, which attached these Sunnis to a larger Arab regional identity with a shared goal of eradicating Israel. The Sunni community’s political, diplomatic, and financial support of the Palestinians set them squarely against the Maronites, who resisted turning Lebanon into a forward operating base for the P.L.O. They sought to preserve their vision of a Lebanon free from the region’s destructive political currents and to avoid the Israeli reprisals they rightly feared.

What’s instructive is that the Christians fought in the war. “In 1975, mothers sent their kids to fight the Palestinians,” says Fawaz. “They had a vision for Lebanon.”

That changed when political calculation and greed shifted Christians’ focus from their war against the P.L.O. and Yasser Arafat’s allies to each other. The Christians split into different factions that faced off during the civil war. Two decades after the end of the war, the Christians are still plagued by this fissure, and they are still represented by the same political leaders who took them to war against one another more than 20 years ago. The result, says Fawaz, “is that today the Christians have no vision. They are definitely a numerical minority and acting like one—reactive and fearful.”

The Christian community here is suffering from a number of symptoms of minority psychosis. Consider that the head of the Maronite church has spoken out in defense of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Patriarch Beshara Butros Rai called Assad “open-minded” in a September interview. “I am hoping Assad will be given more chances to implement the reforms he already launched,” Rai added. An unfortunately all-too-typical Christian fear and hatred of Sunnis has convinced many Lebanese Christians—as well as Syrian ones—that only Damascus’ Alawite minority regime can protect the region’s Christians from Sunni Islamists.

Obviously, a regime that has slaughtered protesters for almost a year hardly embodies the sort of values promoted in the gospel, or warrants the faith of a cleric. But more to the point: This is the same Syrian regime that waged an open-ended campaign of terror against Lebanon’s Christians starting in 2005. Christian politicians and journalists were assassinated; bombs detonated in Christian regions of the country. And the official head of Lebanon’s Christian community is now appealing to Assad for protection?

The Maronites had always distinguished themselves as among the region’s most stubbornly independent of confessional sects. But fear, resentment, and short-sighted political calculation have led them today to seek protection and patronage from the Middle East’s most dangerous and retrograde elements: Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah. Recently, Fawaz explains, senior church officials came out in favor of the arms of Hezbollah’s Islamic resistance. “The Maronite church,” Fawaz says, “has taken a position defending the party that stands accused of killing the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafiq Hariri.” Fear has compelled the Christians to abandon logic as well as moral scruple.

In the aftermath of the February 2005 assassination of Hariri, Damascus withdrew its troops from Lebanon after almost 30 years. That represented a golden opportunity for the country’s Christians. “They’d been resisting Syrian hegemony in order to regain a free and independent Lebanon,” Fawaz says. “With Syria out, the Christians had what they always said they wanted: Sunni leadership that had a Lebanon-first policy.” Some Christian parties did ally themselves with the largest Sunni party, led by the late Hariri’s son Saad. But the majority, under the leadership of Michel Aoun, the former head of the Lebanese army, partnered with Hezbollah instead.

In other words, today’s Christians seem less motivated by their vision of an independent Lebanon than by their hatred of the Sunnis. It’s true that Lebanese Christians, like other minority groups here, including the Shiites, suffered terrible persecution at the hands of the Sunnis, who for centuries treated them as second-class citizens (at best). But Lebanon’s current Sunni leaders are not Ottomans, never mind jihadists. Like the Christians themselves, the Sunni leadership here promotes liberal values and a liberalized economy.

By openly siding against the Sunnis and allying with Hezbollah—and by extension Iran—the Christians have let identity politics and ideology, rather than interests and values, drive policy. The Sunnis are the regional majority, and no matter what sort of revolutionary project Iran has in store for the Middle East, the Sunnis aren’t going anywhere.

The question for the Christians is how to respond to the upheavals that have reshaped the region over the last year. Lebanon’s Christian population has the power to set the agenda for the rest of their regional co-religionists. Either they can identify and work with those Sunnis who share their same vision for Lebanon and the rest of the region, or they can let ancient wounds dictate a strategy of resentment that will ensure their demise.

Those inclined to discount the possibility of a Christian-free Middle East would do well to remember that Jews, in the recent past, had a significant place in the Ottoman Empire and Iran. Were it not for the birth of a sovereign Jewish state that took in Jewish refugees thrown out by countries that turned against them, this regional minority might well have disappeared half a century ago. Without an Israel of their own, if the Christians don’t get it right their era in the Middle East may be coming to an end.

Hamas Concedes That Gaza Is Not Occupied

Saturday, January 21st, 2012

By Elizabeth Samson www.TheJewishWeek.com (New York)

In a stunning about-face, and after decades of violence justified by excuses of being under occupation, this week Hamas has admitted that Gaza is not occupied by Israel. And yet, the United Nations, which has long been reluctant to acknowledge Gaza’s change in status, is still silent on the issue.

In response to a statement by Hamas Politburo Chief Khaled Mashaal that Hamas will hold mass demonstrations against Israel inside Gaza to parallel those organized by the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, Hamas Foreign Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar declared such a protest to be irrelevant. Al-Zahar stated that while the West Bank is “still under occupation” and that all forms of resistance, including armed resistance, should be used in that territory, “popular resistance is inappropriate for the Gaza Strip.” “Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip?,” al-Zahar asked. “When Gaza was occupied, that model was applicable.”

The international law of occupation requires that a hostile army have “effective control” over a territory in an area where its authority can be exercised, and to the exclusion of the territory’s established government. As foreign minister speaking on behalf of the Hamas government, al-Zahar is giving public credence to what has been a fact since September 2005 – that Israel is no longer in Gaza and that the Israeli government does not displace Hamas’s authority. The assertion that Gaza is no longer occupied is strongly supported by international law derived from the Geneva Conventions and legal precedent. For Hamas to state otherwise would undermine its own power and would be a profound display of the weakness of its government.

For decades, the notion that Israel is an occupier has been the rallying cry of the Palestinian people, seemingly an almost greater raison d’etre for them than an actual pursuit of self-determination, as evidenced by the consistent rejection of every peace offer presented to the Palestinians and the unyielding rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel. While renouncing the language of occupation with respect to Gaza may be perceived as a concession to Israel, al-Zahar is actually demonstrating the strength of his government and boldness in the face of detractors in Gaza who are desperate for an excuse to continue to fight Israel.

There has been no official Israeli military or civilian presence in Gaza since September 12, 2005, when the last Israeli soldier left the territory and the government declared its specific intent to no longer occupy Gaza and withdrew all of its military and civilian installations. However, UN Watch, an NGO that monitors the actions of the United Nations, has brought further attention to the fact that U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has refused to declare Gaza to be anything other than occupied. As recently as September 22, roughly six years since the Israeli disengagement, the U.N. authorized a mission to visit the “occupied Palestinian territory, specifically the Gaza Strip.” In addition, an official U.N. fact sheet on the “Occupied Palestinian Territories” includes the map of Gaza.

While it is not legally necessary for the U.N. to acknowledge the absence of occupation in Gaza – application of the Geneva Conventions and legal precedent have satisfied those requirements – it is politically important for there to be a recognized change in status so that Israel will no longer be held to the more stringent legal requirements of an occupier and to lend greater legitimacy to Israel’s acts of self-defense. Gaza should have the intermediate status of a “sui generis” territory – unique, of its own kind or class – under the control of its own governing authority for the period between the end of occupation and until the finalization of permanent status negotiations. And, considering that the law, the facts, and the leadership of Hamas all indicate that Gaza is not occupied, there is no legitimate reason to continue to deem Gaza to be under occupation, a legally and factually inaccurate status.

The purpose of the United Nations is “to bring about by peaceful means … adjustment or settlement of … situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.” However, continually declaring that Gaza is still occupied territory and not allowing for an intermediate status may only encourage violence because the Palestinian people in Gaza will feel that their voices are not being heard. Furthermore, by denying a change of status the U.N. is doing the people of Gaza a great disservice — it is denying their autonomy as they struggle to prove their worthiness as a nation among nations.

In light of the groundbreaking proclamation by Hamas Foreign Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar, Secretary Ban should abandon the outdated and inaccurate rhetoric of occupation employed by the U.N. for so long. The United Nations should now seize the opportunity to have the words and actions of the organization reflect its stated determination “to promote social progress” and extend “better standards of life in larger freedom” to the Palestinian people of Gaza.

Assad’s Alawi allies

Tuesday, January 17th, 2012

By Dore Gold www.IsraelHayom.com

The Saudi-owned Arabic daily Asharq Alawsat published an analysis by a Jordanian commentator last week that asked an important question: How has Bashar Assad continued to stay in power for nearly a year since the revolt against his regime began, while the Tunisian and Egyptian leaders were overthrown in just a few weeks? True, Moammar Gadhafi fell from power because of external intervention, but his regime collapsed in a relatively short period of time. According to the Asharq Alawsat article, the difference between these cases and the revolt against the Syrian regime is the Syrian Army, whose officer class has a large contingent of Alawis belonging to the same religious minority as the Assad family. It makes sense that these officers understand they are fighting not only for Assad’s political survival, but for the Alawis’ very future in Syria.

Who are the Alawis and why might they be at risk if Assad falls? The Alawis are a relatively small minority in Syria, making up at most 12 percent of the population. In comparison, Sunni Muslims are roughly 75% of the Syrian population. Their faith provides a special role for the fourth caliph of Islam, Ali, and because of their name Alawis – or followers of Ali – are often thought to constitute a legitimate branch of Islam. But aside from their use of the Koran, Alawis rely on their own holy book that is not recognized by other Muslims. Their religious faith is based on revering a trinity of three individuals as divine manifestations: Muhammad, Ali, and a third individual named, Salman al-Farisi, a Persian Christian who became a Muslim and knew Muhammad in Medina. Their actual religious rituals are kept secret. They do not build mosques. Yet, in the 1970s, Lebanese Shiite leader Imam Musa Sadr issued a proclamation that the Alawis were legitimate Muslims.

Unlike Imam Musa Sadr, Sunni religious clerics have viewed the Alawis over the centuries as heretics who are not part of the Islamic world. They were not even defined as “people of the book,” like Jews and Christians under the Ottoman Empire. They sought to isolate themselves in the Nusayriya mountains in western Syria, above the city of Latakia. When Ottoman rule over Syria was replaced with French rule, the Alawis had an opportunity to improve their standing. They backed the French mandatory authorities and as a result were recruited into the Syrian military in disproportional numbers along with other minorities, like the Druze and the Ismailis. After Syria’s independence, the Alawis were attracted to the military because it provided them with a vehicle for upward social mobility to escape poverty. The Alawi officers launched massive recruitment drives of fellow Alawis, whom they could trust. In the meantime, the Alawis were attracted to the secular orientation of the Ba’ath party in Syria, which first came to power in 1963, since in a secular state, religious sectarianism would be expected to matter far less. Between the Syrian Army and the Ba’ath party, the Alawis had a firm grip over Syria, despite their small numbers.

The rise of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East during the recent insurrections undoubtedly must influence Alawi calculations to defeat the revolt against Assad at all costs. Over the last 30 years, Saudi Arabia has been promoting Wahhabi Islam in the Sunni Muslim world, by many times employing Muslim Brotherhood networks. The Salafi movements that have arisen as a result of these efforts take an even more hostile view of the Alawis than traditional Sunni Islam. The Saudis’ Wahhabi religious leaders have seen their role as one of cleansing Islam from any traces of polytheism, like saint worship, by giving them nearly divine status. Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti in the 1990s used to call the Alawi-dominated Ba’ath party “Hizb al-Shaitan,” meaning “party of the devil.”

The Muslim Brotherhood is less visible in the Syrian opposition today compared with its role in insurrections in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is stronger outside of Syria than inside. This might be explained, in part, by their having been decimated in February 1982 by Hafez al-Assad, in the city of al-Hamma, where the Syrian Army massacred more than 20,000 civilians. Whatever the reason for the lower profile of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, Bashar Assad’s Alawi officers have to assume that should they be defeated–leading the Sunni majority to take over Syria–a bloodbath would ensue against the Alawis.

Despite the war of the Assads against the Muslim Brotherhood, other Islamists have managed to penetrate Syria over the last decade, who could magnify traditional antipathy to the Alawis. Because Syria served as a rear base for Sunni volunteers entering Iraq to fight the U.S., many extremist religious groups took root in the Syrian countryside. For example, back in 2007, the Syrian army already had to use helicopter gunships against al-Qaeda affiliates that were attacking its units, like Jund al-Sham.

In recent months, Alawis were reminded of how Sunni clerics from Islamist circles view them. Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Global Muslim Brotherhood, called the Assad government “a heretical regime.” Sheik Adnan al-Arour, a Syrian Sunni religious leader, appeared on a Saudi television network in June and addressed his words specifically to the Alawis who were opposing the Syrian uprising: “I swear by God we will mince them in grinders and feed their flesh to the dogs.”

Given the prevalence of these sentiments, the revolt in Syria has all the trappings of an existential war for the Alawi minority, which explains, but hardly justifies, the reprehensible policies their army has adopted. Moreover, the ultimate consequences of the Syrian civil war have not been lost on the Israel Defense Forces. They also could explain why Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz told the Knesset Foreign and Defense Committee this week that Israel must prepare for a wave of Alawi refugees who might seek refuge in Israel as the conflict continues in Syria.


Zola Levitt Presents
Levitt Letter
Tours
Podcasts