Gotham City was real — at least for a few days. Fires, looting, destruction, murder, mayhem, anarchism engulfed many cities and states in the biggest democracy on the planet. The Joker would have been proud, while Martin Luther King had to be turning over in his grave as anarchists and left-wing terrorists usurped his cause and under the false guise of protecting and furthering his legacy, tried to break the United States and push it into the flames of all-out civil war.

Turning Protests Violent

To be honest and fair with history, it is not the first time that certain violent groups infiltrate protests to further their agendas. It is not a secret that anarchist organizations, left-wing activists and billionaire philanthropists have as a goal the total destruction of the emblem of democracy and rule of law: the United States of America. They are on record admitting this, so it is neither a conspiracy nor an exaggeration.

These groups work behind the shadows to segregate people based on their race, sexual orientation, ideology and gender. In doing so, their aim is to pit the different societal groups they have created against one another. They try to make everything in our lives, including every conflict and each misunderstanding about race and gender. The brainwashing that occurs makes it possible to divide the world into victims and oppressors. This ideology states that if one is white then one is bad. White people should shut up and be discredited if they do speak up. If you are a straight white male in America, but also in Europe, you are by definition the oppressor. You are made to feel like you have committed the most egregious of sins. The media, which survives and enriches itself from the money of these groups, pushes this way of thinking and the brainwashing continues. The Democratic Party in America, and all political parties on the left embrace this divisive strategy. It was the Democratic Senator from Hawaii that during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings said all men should shut up just because they are men — an outrageously incendiary and prejudicial comment.

The Authoritarian Left Playbook: Divide and Conquer

This division and this ideology are the racist ones. They breathe life into the fires of division and hatred. There is nothing stronger than the love for family, country, neighbor, anthem, flag and tradition. However, if you put people into groups, if you segregate them into racial and gender categories and if you teach them to think into these terms, it is easier to divide them and ruin their country. This is the reason America is burning today. By brainwashing people into thinking they are victims, it is easier to rule over them and make them do your bidding. This is the strategy of the left. It wants certain groups of people to think they are weak, because once they understand their potential for greatness, they will choose what is best for them.

What happened with George Floyd was pure murder and nobody, in the US or elsewhere, disputed that. It was a terrible, tragic, heartbreaking event. His murder was condemned from the highest offices of Washington, to the simplest citizen. President Trump urged that those responsible face justice immediately, while expressing his condolences and sorrow for what happened. Police officers everywhere condemned their killer colleagues without hesitation. The perpetrators were immediately fired. It was the perfect opportunity for everyone to come together as a nation and mourn Floyd, make sure his killers received the harshest punishment under the law and discuss how to confront violence and root out the corruption that is inside the police.

Are there bad cops? Of course, there are. There are corrupt policemen and policewomen who kill whites and blacks. In fact, according to the official statistics, they kill more whites than blacks. Why not address the causes of violence? There are ways to identify the bad cops and prevent these cases. The Wall Street Journal had an op-ed piece providing a solution to this. However, bad cops are a very small percentage. The idea that a black person cannot go out of their homes without fear of being killed due to racism is false and ill-intentioned. I am not alone in saying this! Larry Elder, a black attorney, Martin Luther King Jr.;s niece Alveda King and many other respected people from the black community have consistently sought to dispel this myth.

Black On Black Crime is a Deadly Serious Problem

On the other hand, it is also true that blacks are the ones who kill more blacks. Where are these far-left organizations such as Black Lives Matter in the black neighborhoods? Why have they not done anything to improve the lives of the black community, build schools for them, and make their communities safer? Why is black on black crime higher in states run by Democrats – the very ones who claim to have the best interest of this community at heart? The ongoing black on black murder rate in Chicago and Baltimore is one of the most horrendous and tragic things in America. These crimes go unsolved and the individuals many times do not have the resources to hire lawyers. This increases their belief that the system is stacked against them.

However, we should remember that they are worse-off in states led by the left. Why has the welfare state created by the left wing President Lyndon B. Johnson not helped black people? Moreover, why unemployment of the black community dropped to record level only when a Republican President took office? We have on one hand the identity politics rhetoric of the left who wants the votes of the black community and for them to be dependent on the government and on the other we have the conservative solution of letting them free to make their decisions, get proper education and careers.

Racism is Real, ‘Systemic Racism’ is Propaganda

Are there racist people in the US? For sure there are, in the US and elsewhere. There are white people who are racist just as there are black people who are racist. However, to say that there is systemic racism is simply untrue. To say that all Americans and Europeans are racist is false. Racism is shunned by the majority of people in the US and in Europe. Having racist people in a society and being racist as a society are two very different things.  In 2019, there were 10 shootings of unarmed black people. So, in a nation of 330 million, does that statistic prove black people are targeted by police systemically? No, it does not, especially when compared to the number of black on black murder. Both of these occurrences need to be addressed. No one disputes that. Nevertheless, let us ask this: if the US were the racist and evil place that the media and the left depict, then why would millions of people cross the border illegally to live there?

There are white Americans or white Europeans that have a harder life than many black people do, and the opposite is also true. How can a whole population be racist, when they elected a black President, have had black Secretaries of State, Attorney Generals, prosecutors, army leaders and officials in the highest levels? No other country gives the opportunity to become whomever you want, from basketball player, to actor, musician, and even President, as the US does. The capitalistic meritocratic system in the US made of these celebrities and sportspeople billionaires. Yet, many of them hate America and want to see it burn.

‘You Ain’t Black’

Yes, there are racists in America. They are those like Joseph Biden, previous Vice President under Obama and current Democratic nominee for President, who said that if you do not vote for a Democrat you are not black. This is called identity politics and it is disgustingly racist. It is practiced by the mainstream media, the Democratic Party, their counterparts in Europe, the Hollywood elites and all their followers who cannot think for themselves. To order people to think, speak or vote in a certain way just because of their skin color, gender or sexual orientation is plainly racist and should be condemned by elected officials, by the media and by every citizen. However, the media is corrupt, and half of the public officials get their funding by far-left organizations.

It is very difficult today to find objective commentary or reporting in the media. Most of the media and almost all the celebrities are so far left and anti-Trump that they are willing to see America and the world burn just to destroy the American President. They could not bring him down with the Russia collusion hoax, the impeachment, countless accusations, the pandemic, so now they are resorting to civil unrest. They are encouraging and justifying the thugs burning down businesses because it suits their agenda.

Protests Have Been Hijacked by Extremists and Criminals

There is no doubt that there were peaceful protesters when the protests started. They were the people who initially went into the streets, and their cause and aim were undoubtedly sincere. They went out to protest because they are poor and frustrated about what they feel is injustice.  However, the protests were hijacked by the Marxist organization Black Lives Matter, the far-left anarchists Antifa and also the street thugs that simply want chaos. Many of these thugs, in their lust for destruction, let slip to the few honest journalists on the ground that they were there to steal and destroy, admitting they were being paid to do that. Nothing to do with the death of George Floyd. What Antifa and Black Lives Matter are doing is not only criminal and illegal, but also an insult to the memory of Floyd. At least, they are exposing themselves for what they truly are.

These two groups want to destroy America as it is and remake it into a communist country. They have stated it themselves. That is why they are burning businesses of innocent people and targeting only white neighborhoods. They see them as a symbol of capitalism and meritocracy, freedom of expression and entrepreneurship. One of the editors of the New York Times, together with many so-called journalists admitted that fire is necessary so that a new America is born, like the phoenix. They want to implement the opposite of the values upon which America was built. Just by looking at the program of the Marxist Black Lives Matter, one can understand the type of tyrannical vision they have.

A recent report uncovered by Sean Hannity shows that they have been planning the riots and destruction since November 2019. This is further proof that they do not care about the black community, simply want to use them. Otherwise they would not have killed a retired black police officer, Captain David Dorn. Captain Dorn was killed for the sin of protecting the business of his friend. Why are there no protests over his death? Why did the media not cover his murder by the rioters? Why did no celebrity post anything on social media in solidarity? Why has the media not mentioned that the rioters set fire to a home with a child inside and then blocked the firefighters’ access to the home? Using just causes for political purposes is evil and there should be agreement by all sides on this. However, when people do not get the full objective story by the media, it is unavoidable that there will be division, which certain politicians will use without shame. Statism is what breeds more racism, so we should all be aware of those who advocate for it. We should not forget that it was the left that advocated for racism and it was the Republican Party that abolished it, under Abraham Lincoln. Left-wing politicians were supporters of the Klan. What is currently happening is just a derivation of it, under the guise of equality. It is the same mentality, just different tactic.

How to Solve racism?

The solution to racism is simple: the right kind of education. The one that teaches people to think for themselves, raise their individual awareness, make them able to overcome difficulties, make the system more meritocratic and avoid putting people into baskets based on their race or gender. Judging people collectively is a communistic way of thinking aimed at entrapping people into doing others’ bidding. Responsibility should be individual, as should merit. The black community, the white community and everyone should vote for whomever they think will do the best for them. We must understand that all lives matter, all lives are worth having dignity, freedom, education and the opportunity for greatness. If the tax cuts and deregulations helped both the blacks and the whites to have the lowest unemployment ever, than they should reject any politician who tells them how to think, vote and act.

Everyone should see beyond the divisiveness of the mainstream media and the left and value each other for who we are, our actions and achievements, and not race or gender. As soon as we understand this, and reject the sickening identity politics, then we will have made a step closer to the real end of racism.

L'articolo Identity Politics – the Agenda to Burn Down America proviene da InsideOver.

The US military provided evidence of Russian military support for rogue Libyan Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar in his assault on Tripoli. Moscow has often denied allegations that it is supporting the rebel force in the Libyan civil war, but satellite photographs released on May 26 revealed Russian MiG-29 fighter jets on an airstrip Libya.

Undeniable Proof

US Africa Command (AFRICOM) said the planes were repainted during a layover in Syria in order to mask their origin, according to a New York Times report. Now that firm evidence implicates Russia as supporting Haftar in his battle against the UN-recognized government in Libya, the question looms whether Washington will finally dip its toes into the water.

“For too long, Russia has denied the full extent of its involvement in the ongoing Libyan conflict,” said AFRICOM Commander, Gen. Stephen Townsend. “Well, there is no denying it now.”

The photographic evidence is crucial as it represents a significant turn in the Libyan conflict. Prior to the confirmation of Russian fighter jets, Russia’s participation in the conflict was largely based on mercenaries. The half-effort to support Haftar has been faltering, however, as the Government of National Accord (GNA) has been supported by Turkey, and they’ve been successfully repelling Haftar’s advances on the capital.

Evidence of Escalation

With Moscow putting more of its weight into the war, the conflict is likely to escalate, experts warned.

“Not only could Russian air power change the military balance in Libya itself, but this could be the first step in a gradual escalation to what eventually becomes a permanent Russian military deployment in the country,” said Michael Kofman, director of the Russia program at the Center for Naval Analysis.

The victor in the Libyan war may not even matter to Moscow. Experts speculated Russia may use the opportunity to build out its military presence in the state, as Voice of America reported.

“Russia is executing the same playbook as successfully employed in Crimea, Ukraine and to a lesser extent in Syria. Russia has proved its willingness to violate sovereign nations, and appears willing to do the same in Africa,” said Brigadier General Gregory Hadfield, AFRICOM deputy director for intelligence.

In taking a greater interest in Libya, Russia could be playing the long game by creating bases and areas of Russian control. In this way, Moscow could establish a threatening presence in an area beyond its normal scope of interests and NATO’s southern edge. This prospect has the US Pentagon concerned about Russia’s newfound willingness to take a greater stake in the game.

To that end, Gen. Jeff Harrigian, head of US Air Forces in Europe and Africa, said Russia could setup antiaircraft defenses that would both limit American flight operations and threaten the broader security of Europe.

‘Red Line’

The American military leadership “is essentially talking red line here,” Jalel Harchaoui, a research fellow at the Clingendael Institute in The Hague, in a Foreign Policy interview. “This is really the Pentagon trying to scare the White House into taking some kind of action.”

Washington, however, has been extremely reluctant to become involved in another military incursion into Libya following the 2011 civil war and attack on the US mission in Benghazi. In 2014, former President Barack Obama essentially gave up on the situation as the US recommended all its citizens evacuate the state.

President Donald Trump, who campaigned in 2016 on bringing American troops home from the Middle East, has similarly taken a highly cautious approach to Tripoli. While Trump was willing to roll the dice on a number of global hotspots — Iran, Syria, and North Korea, for example — the US military and government has largely refrained from intervening.

President vs. Pentagon

The problem with a possible American intervention is that the president and his officials in the Departments of State and Defense disagree on who to support. In April 2019, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo informed Congress, “We oppose the military offensive by Khalifa Haftar’s forces and urge the immediate halt to these military operations against the Libyan capital.”

However, Trump turned around and called Haftar, and then affirmed his support for the renegade commander. Afterward, he warned Turkey, which supports the GNA, not to get involved.

Then a US official told the Washington Post that the Pentagon was on side against Haftar and urging him to stop his attacks. 

“The message to Haftar was very clear, that we feel a military incursion into Tripoli would be disastrous right now, or ever.”

Different President, Different Goals

Although American military leadership is warning of long-term consequences of Russian involvement, Trump is unlikely to take action, even if he should. Firstly, the Benghazi attack remains a major conservative attack angle against Democrats, particularly Trump’s 2016 opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 

If the White House could put aside fears of a Benghazi repeat, it would have to overcome the issue that is Trump’s continued defiance of traditional US geopolitical goals. Since he came to office, the American leader has rolled back a number of international agreements designed to make the world more peaceful, such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia, or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran.

On a larger scale, Trump has targeted allies by not only attacking NATO, but questioning the very need for its existence. Trump also  hurriedly pulled US troops from Syria, letting Russia and Turkey swoop in, sacrificing nearly a decade of gains against the Islamic State.

The American leader has even pushed for foreign allied states to pay for the pleasure of hosting US military bases. These are not that actions of a commander-in-chief who would make the right call in a new military intervention.

America stepping into Libya a year ago might not have made sense, and from some perspectives it still might not. Concerns of Russia establishing a long-term hold in the state may be overblown, but Moscow has certainly established a precedent and willingness to extend its reach across the Middle East, and now possibly North Africa.

Obama has cited Libya as one of his greatest failures for mishandling the Arab Spring fallout. Trump may be set up to make his own mistake, this time for not stopping Moscow soon enough.

L'articolo US Military Warns of Russia’s Plans for Libya, but Will Trump Act? proviene da InsideOver.

U.S. sanctions that have strangulated Sudan’s economy for the past 23-years are likely to soon be lifted, after the impoverished northeastern African country grudgingly acceded to paying $30 million as compensation to 17 American sailors who died in 2000 when their ship, the USS Cole, was attacked by suicide bombers while refueling in the port of Aden in Yemen. The attack also wounded 39 sailors.
The bombing, attributed to the al Qaeda terrorist group foreshadowed the devastating September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, with a US court in 2014 concluding that Sudan had provided Qaeda with aid leading to the attack and awarding the families $35 million in compensation. Sudan finally paid the compensation on February 7.

Sudan’s Current Situation

Sudan’s announcement of a compensation deal comes as the African nation undergoes a fragile transition after the fall last year of president Omar al-Bashir, who ruled with an iron fist for nearly three decades. Sudan’s interim ruling council led by Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok is now seeking to shake off decades of diplomatic and economic isolation. Being removed from the American list of state sponsors of terrorism would be a significant step.

“It was the former regime that supported terrorism and the Sudanese people revolted against it. These sanctions have caused tremendous suffering to our people,” Hamdok — who was appointed prime minister in August — said during an address at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) this past September.
“Therefore we call on the United States to remove Sudan from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and to stop punishing the people of Sudan for crimes committed by the former regime,” he added.

‘It is Time to Remove Sudan from the List of State Supporters of Terrorism’

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called for Sudan, which is Africa’s third biggest producer of gold to be removed from the US list of state sponsors of terrorism, as Khartoum slowly returns to the international fold.

“It is time to remove Sudan from the list of state supporters of terrorism, and to mobilize massive international support to enable Sudan to overcome its challenges,” the UN chief said Feb. 10 during an address at the annual African Union summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

The US government added Sudan to its list of state sponsors of terrorism in 1993 over allegations that then-President Bashir’s government was supporting “terrorist” groups.

The designation made Sudan technically ineligible for debt relief and financing from the IMF and World Bank. Washington began a formal process to de-list Sudan in January 2017, but this was put on hold when Sudan’s mass protests erupted a year ago. The uprising toppled Bashir and eventually forced the military into a power-sharing agreement with civilians.

Pompeo: ‘Sudan is a Cooperative Partner of the United States on Counter-Terrorism’

According to the United States’ most recent Annual Terrorism Report — written while Bashir was still in office — Sudan is no longer a sponsor of international terrorism.

“Notwithstanding its history, countering terrorism is today a national security priority for Sudan, and Sudan is a cooperative partner of the United States on counter-terrorism, despite its continued presence on the State Sponsors of Terrorism List,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said recently that the Trump administration had considered lifting the terrorism designation for Sudan “for quite some time.”

“The Sudanese reminded me that they would love to get off that list and we always measure twice and cut once before we remove someone from a list like that,” Pompeo remarked.

The $300 Million 2012 Judgment Against Sudan

In 2012, a Washington judge ordered Sudan to pay more than $300 million to the victims’ families of the attack on the USS Cole. Other judges went on to order certain banks to make Sudanese assets available to start paying the sum.

However in March, 2019, the US Supreme Court overturned on procedural grounds a lower court’s ruling ordering Sudan to pay damages to the families of the victims.
Pompeo said that the USS Cole issue was one element in the terror designation but said that no decision has been made.

“We’ve been looking at whether to lift the designation of state-sponsored terror on Sudan for quite some time,” Pompeo told reporters as he flew to the Munich Security Conference this Feb. 13.

Sudan: Former Home of Osama bin Laden

In 1993, Washington listed Sudan on its terrorism blacklist for its alleged support of Islamist groups. Bin Laden used to reside in Sudan from 1992 to 1996. Sudan’s new authorities have made it a key priority to get the country removed from the blacklist.
Officials in Khartoum say the country’s economic revival has been stunted primarily due to its blacklisting, which deters global investors. In October of 2017, the US lifted its decades old trade embargo imposed on Sudan, but kept the country on the terrorism blacklist.

Sudanese officials and business people argue that the blacklisting has restrained international banking and transfer of funds, in turn severely impacting the country’s economy. Sudan’s chronic economic trouble — led by high inflation as well as shortages of fuel and foreign currency — was the main trigger for nationwide protests against now ousted leader Bashir. Bashir was removed by the army in a palace coup last April, but the country’s economic woes persist as the new authorities battle to rein in inflation and unemployment.

IMF Predictions on Sudanese Economic Prospects

The IMF predicts Sudanese economy will contract by 2.3% this year, with the country’s current external debt standing at about $60 billion, on which the debt payments are reportedly about $3 billion. Hamdok says the country urgently needs $8 billion to turn the economy around and an additional $2 billion to halt the falling Sudanese pound.

“Public external debt is around $51 billion,” said Stuart Culverhouse, head of sovereign & fixed income research at Exotix, citing 2016 IMF data. “(This) is 88 percent of GDP. The ratio is likely to be higher now because of a weaker currency.”
The IMF stated in its December 2017 report that Sudan was eligible for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) plan – an IMF and World Bank initiative launched in 1996 to help poor countries struggling with external debt obtain debt relief.

“Economic conditions in Sudan have been challenging since the secession of South Sudan in 2011 and the loss of the bulk of oil production and exports, which have compounded the difficult external environment,” the IMF report said.
Once a country has overhauled its debt burden with bilateral and multilateral lenders, it must come to an agreement with private sector lenders before being able to access international capital markets again.

Sudan’s Plan to Come Back From Financial Ruin

Last October Sudan agreed to a roadmap to “rehabilitate” the country with the Bretton Woods institutions including with the African Development Bank, Ibrahim Elbadawi its finance said.

The plan involved structural reforms and as part of the deal Sudan would not have to pay its lenders debt arrears. There could also be non-financial support.
Sudan’s inclusion on a list of countries deemed sponsors of terrorism by the United States makes it ineligible for debt relief and financing from lenders like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, cutting off a crucial source of finance.
According to Elbadwi negotiations with other creditors would begin in March.

“Based on that, Sudan’s debt relief program will start by the end of 2020,” he said, without giving further details.

Elbadawi says “friends of Sudan” will fund its 2020 budget, and said the ministry has submitted financing requests for 20 projects to donors, without identifying who those donors were.

A “friends of Sudan” meeting will be held in Khartoum in early December, he said. Another meeting for donors will be held in April. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have given Sudan $3 billion in aid, agreed soon after Bashir was ousted in April, throwing a lifeline to Sudan’s new military leaders at the time.

Sudan’s new transitional government, formed as part of a three-year deal agreed by military and civilian leaders in August, has been working to remove Sudan from the U.S. sponsors of terrorism list, to potentially open the door for foreign investment and it is clear that this could make a big difference in terms of sanction relief.

L'articolo Sudan Pays Reparations to US Victims as it Seeks Sanctions Relief proviene da InsideOver.

The Arab League has denounced approval by the Turkish parliament of a bill that allows Ankara to send troops to Libya.

In a statement on December 2, the pan-Arab organization said it would continue to offer backing to the political process in Libya on the road to a negotiated settlement to its crisis.

“The Arab League underscores the importance of stopping foreign interference in Libyan affairs,” the league said.

Turkish troop deployment

The statement came only hours after the Turkish parliament approved the bill, which was submitted by Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In his letter to the Turkish parliament, Erodgan said the deployment of Turkish troops in Libya would protect Turkish interests in North Africa and offer support to the Tripoli-based Government of National Accord (GNA).

The expected troop deployment came in the light of a security cooperation deal the GNA signed with Ankara on November 28. This was one of two deals which also included another on the delimitation of maritime boundaries between Turkey and Libya.

Erdogan said the security cooperation pact allows his country to send troops to Libya at the request of the GNA. The GNA requested Turkish military support on December 19.

Escalation of tensions

Turkey’s deployment of troops in Libya will exacerbate tensions in North Africa and in the Eastern Mediterranean region.

Libya now has a fully-fledged civil war, in which Islamist militias affiliated to the GNA and backed by Turkey are pitted against the Libyan National Army (LNA), which contains some of the military commanders that served under the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

The LNA controls almost three-quarters of Libya, including the country’s eastern part, its south and some parts of western Libya.

The GNA is locked in Tripoli, some parts of Misurata and some parts of western Libya.

The LNA is now marching towards Tripoli and has succeeded in overrunning some of the districts of the Libyan capital. It wants to significantly reverse the military situation in Libya before Erdogan can send any formidable military support to the GNA and its Islamist militias.

Opposition

By deploying its troops in Libya, Turkey will be part of this civil war, but it will be there to back one party, namely the GNA, against the other: the LNA.

Some of the Turkish lawmakers who debated Erdogan’s troop deployment request on December 2 expressed fears from this.

One of these lawmakers even asked about why Turkish troops would be sent to fight in the deserts of Libya.

There is also regional opposition to Turkish military presence in Libya, including from Egypt, Greece and Cyprus which see in the planned Turkish troop deployment an increasing of tensions in the region.

Arab League

The Arab League’s December 2 condemnation of the Turkish parliament’s approval of the expected Turkish troop deployment came only days after the league called for preventing foreign interference in Libyan affairs.

At an emergency meeting at the league headquarters in Cairo on December 31, the league said foreign interference in Libyan affairs would ease the relocation of extremists and terrorists from some conflict zones, including Syria, to Libya.

It expressed concern about what it described as “military escalation” in Libya.

“This escalation makes the Libyan crisis worse and threatens the security of Libya’s neighboring countries,” it added.

Limits

On December 2, the Libyan parliament, which is based in the northeastern Libyan city of Tobruk, called on the league to ask its member states to activate a 1950 common defense pact between Arab states.

Nevertheless, the league’s ability to take action in this regard is very limited, given rifts among Arab states on what is happening in Libya, analysts said.

The league has 22 member states, but these states do not share the same view on developments in Libya, they added.

“Some of the states inherently back Turkey, like in the case of Qatar,” said Libyan affairs specialist, Abdel Sattar Heteita. “Other states support opposing parties in the conflict.”

L'articolo Arab League Joining Opponents Of Turkey’s Libya Moves proviene da InsideOver.

For the first time since the outbreak of conflict in Syria, an official delegation visited Saudi Arabia at an invitation by Saudi Journalists Commission (equal to an NUJ) as well as an invitation by the General Secretariat of Arab Journalists Unions for its regular meeting in Riyadh last week. The Syrian delegation included Chairman of the Journalists Union Mousa Abdennour and member of the General Secretariat Ilyas Mourad. I spoke to Abdennour, a long-time colleague and friend, after his return from the Saudi capital to suss out the atmosphere surrounding the first Syrian participation in an event in Saudi Arabia for eight years.

“The reception was warm, and participation positive. The Saudi hosts proposed signing a bilateral agreement with our union, as they did with other participants at the General Secretariat’s regular meeting. We asked them to send a draft agreement that we’ll examine before any signature. We hope this participation signals some positive return of warmth to the Syrian-Saudi relations as the war draws nearer to its final chapters,” Abdennour told me earlier today.

Symbolic gesture that could herald a new opening

Although on the surface, this might look like a mere participation in a normal event, the fact that Syrian official unions representing a government that Saudis, along with other Gulf and Arab nations have boycotted for over eight years now, carries a strong symbolic significance that could herald a landmark turn of political tide between Damascus and some Arab nations accused of supporting and exporting tens of thousands of hardline Islamic militants and terrorists in a massive effort and stated campaign to topple the Syrian government and oust President Bashar al Assad in person.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia, in particular, have spent billions of US dollars to that end, as Qatari former Foreign Minister and Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassem Bin Jabr admitted in an interview with the BBC last year. The embarrassing confessions made by the Qatari official in the course of that interview included claiming that “Saudi Arabian royalty entrusted the role of government and regime change in Syria to the Qataris, but later on left us alone in that mission which ended in an abysmal failure”.  As a result of that fiasco, Bin Jassem and his Qatari Emir Hamad Bin Khalifa were themselves ousted, and the Syrian leader appears more defiant and confident of victory than ever.

More signs of Saudi/Gulf diplomatic comeback

For the first time in eight years, the United Arab Emirates – along with Bahrain – which resumed diplomatic ties with Syria last December, hosted an official reception last week marking its 48^th National Day celebrations. The event which was attended by Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal al Mikdad was marked by an unusually warm and friendly speech delivered by the Emirati Head of Mission in Damascus Abdel Hakeem Al Nuaimi, who reiterated the strength and speciality of Syrian-UAE relations. “We wish that peace and security prevail all over the Syrian Arab Republic, under the wise leadership of his excellency Dr Bashar al Assad,” al Nuaimi said in his written speech. Many considered this positive language a strong sign of the new approach adopted by the UAE towards Damascus and president Assad.

Today, passers by the Saudi embassy in the Syrian capital reported some maintenance and refurbishment works underway, which might indicate that a resumption of Saudi-Syrian diplomatic ties could be imminent, although no date has been fixed for such an important step. Normalization of relations between Damascus and the most important Arab nation in the Gulf will reflect positively on Syria’s political as well as economic stature. The Syrian economy has been badly hit by the outcome of the conflict, now in its ninth year, as well as by a strangling chain of economic sanctions led by the United States and the European Union and implemented by many US-allied Arab nations.

The Syrian infrastructure has been severely damaged as a result of the war, and the cost of reconstruction is estimated to run into over one trillion US dollars. Oil-rich Arab Gulf countries are expected to foot much of that bill, and could, along with China, Iran and Russia, carry out the reconstruction and investment mission, despite repeated official Syrian statements that those nations which took part in the war on Syria shall have no role or place in the reconstruction process. In politics they say, there’s neither a permanent friendship nor a permanent animosity; Syria might well be the place where this theory is set to be put into yet another fresh practice.

L'articolo Arab Pilgrimage to Damascus: Signs of Saudi Diplomatic Comeback proviene da InsideOver.

The interim Libyan government has started taking measures to return hundreds of thousands of externally displaced Libyans, especially in Egypt, to their country.

Interim Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani, held a series of meetings in the past few days to check progress on the implementation of the plan.

The plan is part of a national reconciliation initiative launched by the government, which is based in the eastern commercial industrial city of al-Bayda.

The initiative aims at bringing the Libyans together, following years of fighting and unrest in the oil-rich North African state.

On November 28, al-Thani held a meeting in the Egyptian capital Cairo with some members of his cabinet to discuss incentives in the plan for returning Libyans living in Egypt home.

To convince them to do this, the interim government is offering to pay for their travel and provide them with accommodation and financial support once they return, according to Ali al-Sagheir, the head of the Committee on Externally Displaced Libyans.

He said the government would find jobs for unemployed externally displaced Libyans when they return home and return civil servants to their original jobs before the 2011 revolution against longstanding ruler Muammar Gaddafi.

Over a million Libyans flocked to Egypt following the eruption of the Libyan civil war in 2011.

Nonetheless, with eastern Libya becoming more stable, hundreds of thousands of Libyan nationals returned to their country. Now, around half a million Libyans live here.

These are the people al-Thani and the members of his cabinet want to return home.

However, the new initiative raises questions on whether these Libyans would be ready to go back home, especially with the situation in Libya still uncertain.

Although most of eastern Libya is stable, there are turbulent areas in the North African state, including in southern Libya. Some territories are controlled by terrorist groups like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and al-Qaeda.

A war is raging on now on the fringes of capital Tripoli between the National Libyan Army, which controls most of eastern and central Libya, on one hand, and military groups operating under the internationally recognized National Accord Government, which controls the capital and most of western Libya, on the other.

Efforts are being made by the United Nations and different members of the international community to bring about a peaceful settlement to the conflict in Libya. Nonetheless, this conflict is set to exacerbate even more in the coming days with rival regional and international powers backing rival Libyan forces.

These deteriorating conditions are a major hurdle on the way of the return of Libyans displaced outside their country.

Most of those who ran away from Libya were backers of Gaddafi and members of his tribe or members of tribes allied to him.

After Gaddafi’s overthrow, these people were at the centre of public reprisals, which was why they had to run away.

In 2012, the Libyan parliament passed a law that denied Gaddafi’s backers the right to participate in Libya’s political life. The same law stipulated penalties for Gaddafi’s supporters.

Nevertheless, in 2014, the eastern Libya parliament passed a law that offered a general pardon for Gaddafi’s backers. The law is part of a nationwide reconciliation campaign aiming at settling conflicts between Libyans peacefully.

Interim Social Affairs Minister, Fathia Hamed, said huge efforts are made to bring the Libyans together.

The initiative for bringing externally displaced Libyans back home, she said, is based on the national reconciliation plan.

“We will use this plan to convince the Libyans return to their country,” Hamed said. “It is an integral part of the general pardon initiative launched by Libyan state institutions.”

L'articolo Will Externally Displaced Libyans Return Home? proviene da InsideOver.

Egypt and the east Libyan government are discussing ways of expanding cooperation in the field of oil production, with expectations for Egyptian state-owned petroleum companies to start operating in Libya soon.

During a visit to Cairo in late October, Chairman of Libya’s National Oil Corporation, Mustafa Sanallah, said his country needed to enlist the services of Egyptian companies in the reconstruction, maintenance and overhaul of Libyan oil facilities.

“We especially need to benefit from Egyptian expertise in implementing petroleum infrastructure projects,” Sanallah said.

He added at a meeting with Egyptian Petroleum Minister, Tarek al-Mullah, on October 27 that his corporation wanted to benefit from Egyptian expertise in the design and the implementation of oil projects as well as the maintenance of petroleum facilities.

This came as Libya tried to make up for the losses it sustained over the past years because of its unrest and the war raging on in some parts of the country.

The North African oil-rich nation has been suffering political and civil unrest since the downfall of the Muammar Gaddafi regime in 2011, which has taken its toll on its ability to maintain oil production and exports.

This year alone, Libya lost 25 million barrels of oil, according to the corporation.

This translates into billions of dollars in lost revenues, money Libya is badly in need of to reconstruct its cities ravaged by war and conflicts.

Libya now produces around 1.3 million barrels of oil every day. This is by far the highest production level since mid-2013. Nevertheless, this is a lot lower than the pre-2011 production level of 1.6 million barrels every day.

But this is just a fraction of what Libya used to produce five decades ago. In 1969, when Gaddafi came to power, Libya produced 3.1 million barrels of oil every day. In 1970, this daily production rose to 3.35 million barrels.

However, the lack of maintenance for the country’s oilfields and political interference caused the production to significantly drop.

Libya can easily increase its daily production to five million barrels, according to Libyan and Egyptian petroleum specialists.

This is especially true if the required maintenance has been carried out in existing fields and new fields come online, they add.

This is what the expected cooperation between Egypt and the National Oil Corporation can do, given the record of Egyptian companies in overhauling the Egyptian petroleum sector. The same companies also participate in the upgrade of oilfields and facilities in other Arab and African states.

Mulla said Egyptian companies are ready to help Libya return to normal petroleum production levels.

“Egyptian companies will participate in the reconstruction of oilfields affected by the unrest in Libya,” he added during his meeting with Sanallah.

Egyptian participation is of crucial importance for the implementation of the plans of the National Oil Corporation. The corporation has a plan to raise production to 2 million barrels every day by 2022 and 2.2 million barrels a day by 2024.

To make this production raise, the corporation needs to invest approximately $15 billion in the coming five years. This money will be spent on the utilization of technologies that will improve and expand production and existent pipelines.

The presence of these required investments is a daunting mission for the National Oil Corporation, given Libya’s ongoing conflicts, especially the ongoing war between the National Libyan Army and the forces of the internationally-recognized National Accord Government which controls Libyan capital Tripoli.

The fact that some terrorist organizations, including the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, have taken root and grown in most of Libya also scares international oil companies away from investing in the Libyan oil sector.

The same security challenges are expected to face Egyptian companies when they start operating in Libya.

How Egypt will overcome these challenges as it tries to do business with the neighbouring state will be seen in the coming days.

L'articolo Egypt Eyes Oil Cooperation With Libya, But Challenges Abound proviene da InsideOver.

South Sudan risks witnessing the reignition of a civil war after the main opposition party opposed a Nov. 12 deadline by which day a coalition government should be formed, calling instead for a six-month delay for this crucial step towards a fragile peace deal.

“Suppose we form a government on the 12th, you know what’s going to happen? The ceasefire we’ve been enjoying for over a year will erupt,” said Riek Machar, the exiled rebel leader of, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO) while in Juba, capital of, South Sudan this October 20.

Speaking later at a public event, President Salva Kiir did not directly address the comments from Machar’s camp. He said all parties regarding the agreement had committed to forming the unity government on Nov. 12 and the international community expected that to happen.

“I want to welcome (the opposition) and forget all the bitterness,” Kiir said.

With the US ambassador to the UN, Kelly Craft, saying the Security Council was “disappointed” by Machar’s warnings. The US has said it would reevaluate its relationship with South Sudan if the deadline isn’t met.

The Security Council insists the Nov. 12 should be met. With the South Sudan government spokesman Michael Makuei saying:

No change of schedule nor change of program

Dr. Machar who lives in Khartoum, capital of the neighbouring state of Sudan under house arrest had returned to the country for the second time for a two-day visit beginning  October 19, since inking a revitalized peace deal with President   Salva Kiir, in September 2018, under pressure from international and regional powers.

Gaining independence on 9 July 2011 as an outcome of a 2005 agreement, ending Africa’s longest-running civil war, the relative peace was disrupted again in 2013 when the president fell out with Vice President Machar leading to a conflict that has displaced some four million people to date.

The conflict split from the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), led to the formation of the SPLM-IO, also known as the anti-governmental forces (AGF), in 2013.

There were hopes for an end to the hostilities when the pair signed a peace agreement in 2015. A government of national unity was formed and Machar was appointed vice president once again. But the optimism waned when violence broke out in the capital Juba in early July 2016 and forces from both sides battled each other with tanks, helicopters and other heavy weapons.

After the 2015 truce collapsed and fresh fighting broke out at the presidential palace in Juba in July 2016, Dr. Machar fled to the DR Congo on foot. The United Nations later organized for him to be airlifted for treatment in Khartoum, but later the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) partner states decided that he should not stay in any of the countries bordering South Sudan. He was then exiled to South Africa.

The peace deal has to date stopped a five-year civil war that has killed almost 400,000 people. He was briefly released in June 2018 to participate in the peace negotiations held in Addis Ababa, capital of Ethiopia and Khartoum.

Several attempts at peace have since failed but in September 2018, under pressure from international and regional powers, the warring parties signed an agreement to form a unity government.

The deal allowed Machar to return from exile abroad, but he has since gone to Juba just once, in October last year, to celebrate the signing of the accord.

The power-sharing arrangements under the peace deal were supposed to take effect in May which meant that the rebels were to join a transitional government, integrate fighters into the army and settle disputes over regional boundaries. But the process was delayed by six months until November as both sides disagreed over the terms.

A key provision of the peace deal is the integration of former rebels in the army, which has still not occurred

The SPLM-IO demands security arrangements which involve cantonment, screening, training and reunification of the armed groups, the number of states the country should have, and the entrenchment of the September 2018 agreement, must be met before the formation of the transitional government.

“If security arrangements are not implemented, the country will definitely slide back into civil war. We want our country to have a national army that will defend the constitution and protect the people of South Sudan,” says Manawa Peter Gatkuoth, the deputy spokesman of SPLM-IO.

Both sides have disagreed on details of the deal, including how many states South Sudan should have. Under the accord, they have agreed to hold elections after a three-year transition period.

Also, South Sudan’s opposition leaders say that the government’s failure to make funds available for the implementation of a peace accord could plunge the country back into war.

The SPLM-IO accused President Kiir of failing to provide $100 million needed to support the establishment of a transitional government. Emboldening the criticism are reports that Kiir’s administration instead allocated $700 million to build a highway.

“What is the point of saying that we don’t have funds and yet you have heard that the government is going to build a $700 million road? What is the priority, those roads or the peace?” Henry Odwar, deputy chairman of the rebel group, is reported to have asked by Bloomberg.

In the worst-case scenario, the alternative “would be war,” Odwar said in an interview in the capital, Juba. But the government retorted saying development was the remit of the government with Information Minister Michael Makuei Lueth, saying this September as reported by Bloomberg, that government had started the implementation of the peace accord by delivering food to military barracks, the “opposition forces” are not moving in, he said.

South Sudan’s government has said the international community should help fund that process. So far, it has allocated $10 million of the pledged $100 million, according to the international body monitoring the ceasefire.

The militants, who in May asked for a six-month delay because of ill-preparedness, said the situation hasn’t changed much. There is still no confidence in the security arrangement, according to Odwar.

The Security Council “is of the view that nothing is impossible, nothing is insurmountable,” said South Africa’s ambassador to the UN, Jerry Matthews Matjila. The remaining issues can be discussed by an inclusive government, he said.

One South Sudan expert says the international community is making a mistake. “The UN Security Council took the wrong approach,” Alan Boswell, senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, told The Associated Press.

“Rather than be fixated on Nov. 12, everyone should be focused on pressuring the parties to resolve the issues necessary to form a viable government at less risk of collapse,” he said. “There are much worse scenarios than another delay.”

Another expert suggested a different approach. South Sudan’s government “has consistently acted in bad faith,” said Klem Ryan, former coordinator of the Security Council’s panel of experts monitoring sanctions against South Sudan. “They need to be treated as illegitimate through increased international isolation by the diplomatic community until such time as they show a genuine desire to meet the needs of the people of South Sudan.”

For now, Machar, risks isolation by the international community over his ultimatum on joining the transitional government. “Lack of trust is also another element which compromises their willingness to commit to arrangements they themselves agreed upon. This also erodes citizens’ trust in the leaders in whatever they say to be doing. Political trust is supposed to instil confidence in leaders and citizens,” he said.

President Kiir has brazenly underlined the bad blood existing between himself and Machar saying he will go ahead and form a government on November 12 with or without his political nemesis.

This will certainly be a recipe for further trouble ahead for the world’s youngest state.

L'articolo South Sudan Talks to Form Unity Government Collapse proviene da InsideOver.

Parties in the eight-year-long Syrian civil war have been meeting face to face for the first time to discuss constitutional reforms which will help repair the highly polarised nation. A total of 150 delegates, among them members of the civil society, have been meeting in Geneva, Switzerland under the aegis of the United Nations in what is seen as the first step towards a political solution for the Syrian crisis.

Setting the theme for the conference was the UN Special Envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen who said: “Today could become the beginning of something meaningful for Syria and Syrians everywhere. Together we can make this come through.” He, however, insisted that it was upon the Syrian themselves to decide their destiny by ensuring the political process succeeds. “Do not expect me or my team to tell you what to write in your constitution. The future constitution belongs to Syrians, to the Syrian people and them alone.”

At the centre of the talks is the constitution passed by President Bashar Al Assad just at the beginning of the Syrian civil war in 2012 in an attempt to meet the protesters demands for reforms. Under the constitution, Assad and his Baath party still retain great control over key institutions such as the judiciary, parliament, and the security forces. He is also responsible for nominating the prime minister. The opposition although agreeing that part of the constitution is good, they are demanding amendments that will devolve power away from Damascus.

The government delegation has already struck a compromise tone by promising that they are ready to consider the demands of the opposition by introducing major amendments or coming up with a new constitution altogether. But according to the UN which is playing the role of a mediator, any constitutional reforms adopted by the constitutional committee “ must be popularly approved and transposed into the national legal order by a means that will need to be approved.”

However, there’s more that needs to be done to create a conducive atmosphere for the success of the political process and the attainment of a sustainable peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis. The country needs international support for reconstruction and a clear commitment from the leaders to uphold peace.

The ongoing civil war has left thousands dead, millions displaced and greatly devastated the country’s infrastructure. According to Human Rights Watch, the scale of destruction and devastation is causing a severe and almost insuperable problem in most parts of the country, and in the face of corruption, and continuing insecurity, the humanitarian and reconstructive needs of Syria are immense.

Data from the UN indicates that over 140,000 buildings were damaged, and around 50,000 destroyed during the war. But the figures could be even higher considering that the security situation cannot allow proper assessment of the destruction to be carried out.

Rebuilding infrastructure and houses, together with providing access to health care, education, basic needs and fundamental human rights, are critical in restoring peace and a good life to the people of Syria. But the reconstructive efforts could be greatly complicated by the lengthy duration of the civil war. According to Samir Aita , Syrian economist and the President of “Cercle des Economistes Arabes” Think Tank:  “The longer the conflict, the more economic and complex social mechanisms change the nature and magnitude of the efforts needed to retrieve a sustainable post-war outcome which can ensure steady progress towards decent livelihoods and an acceptable prospective for the affected population.”

He further opines that “reconstruction needs a functioning economy providing construction materials and qualified human resources operating within predictable supply and demand patterns”. But with the Syrian economy in shambles, much cannot be achieved without international support. The country’s revenues have dwindled immensely due to the loss of control of key oil fields to the opposition forces, US sanctions on the importation of crude oil from Iran, and an EU oil embargo.

In 2019, the country’s total budget was $9bn compared to $18bn in 2011 just before the war. Out of the $9bn budget, only $2.5bn was allocated by the government towards reconstruction. This is like a needle in a haystack considering that the UN has put the cost of the country’s reconstruction at approximately $250bn, while Assad’s government has put it at $400bn.

This leads us to the million-dollar question:

Who will meet the cost of the reconstruction of Syria?

Although Russia has played a great role in propping up the Assad government through military power, it has been hesitant to commit itself to the extensive reconstruction of Syria because of its economic challenges caused by the sanctions imposed by the EU and America after the annexation of Crimea. Instead, it has been calling upon America and her allies to meet the reconstruction costs.

On the other hand, America and the European countries have always insisted that they would only be committed to extensive reconstruction of Syria if Assad vacates office and a new government is installed through elections. However, some European countries such as Hungary, Poland and Italy have realised that Assad has won the war, and are secretly willing to engage with him. But despite the  differences over how to deal with Assad,  the United Nations has still managed to raise over $7bn in aid pledges for Syria from different countries

In conclusion, war leads societies to be divided into factions with grievances. For this reason according to Aita, one of the major issues in the post-conflict recovery is how to deal with these grievances. Therefore, apart from the need for international support for reconstruction, Syria will need a clear commitment from the opposing factions to uphold peace and to give reconciliation a chance. The issue of detainees and missing persons from both sides will have to be addressed, and the refugees returning home must be granted protection. This will help create an environment which is vital for the success of the political process, leading to a happy, peaceful and prosperous Syria that respects human dignity.

L'articolo Constitutional Talks offer Syrians Hope but More Needs to be Done proviene da InsideOver.

Growing signs that the ongoing revolt in Lebanon, now in its third week, might turn violent following politicization attempts that aim to change the course of the popular uprising against corruption, austerity measures, deteriorating living standards and traditional political hierarchies. Suspicious local and foreign fingers have been spotted inside the demonstrations encouraging violence against the state. One well-known Lebanese actor, Rafiq Ali Ahmad, went as far as saying ” there’s no revolution without bloodshed, they want blood?  They are most welcome”! His remarks drew much criticism and mockery on social media platforms, reminding people of similar provocations made by some Syrian actors at the outset of the Syrian conflict that have ravaged the country.

Alarm bells as road-blockage paralyzes business

Apart from unfamiliar and sometimes shocking scenes of belly dancers, hubble-bubble make-shift cafes for demonstrators, public kissing footage in some conservative neighborhoods, mounting evidence has emerged of certain political factions and traditional figureheads, whose practices since the end of Lebanon’s 15-year civil war have instigated much of the popular revolution in the first place, trying to ride the uprising and diverge it in a manner that serves their own political agenda.

More alarm bells have been sounded in response to the emergence of foreign personalities and organizations at Lebanon’s sit-ins in recent days, including footage of an American former US embassy staff member in Beirut 2007, Robert Gallagher, giving instructions to demonstrators on how to make their revolt more effective and widespread and form a ‘parallel government in Lebanon, as well as the  large ‘grip’ statue of the infamous originally Serbian- now turned international- Otpor movement believed to have been catalyst to almost ALL regional uprisings of the ‘Arab Spring’ which have brought down regimes and wrecked many nations in recent years. All this and much more is threatening to overturn the popular movement that have paralyzed much of Lebanon’s everyday life and crippled business in the country already suffering huge debt and corruption scandals.

Images of war-torn Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Syria and the civil war in Lebanon itself are still vivid in the minds of many, amid growing  fears of a political vacuum that could completely paralyze the country and provide fertile grounds for a new episode of the ‘ creative chaos’ once preached by former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice following the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al Hariri in 2005. The conflicting agendas of Lebanon’s political dynasties and power houses, many of whom are trying hard to manipulate the current popular uprising, pose a serious threat to the country’s fragile civil peace and security.

Main suspects of evil planning

Most notable of such efforts are those of Samir Geagea, leader of the hardline Maronite Lebanese Forces – Geagea is a convicted war criminal accused of many assassinations and 21 documented crimes including killing Lebanon’s former Prime Minister Rashid Karami, the son of former president Suleiman Frangieh, the son of former president Kamil Chamoun, the Secretary General of Lebanese Maronite Patriarchate Monsignor Albert Khreish , several senior  Lebanese Army officers and 23 civilians at the ‘River of Death’ bridge during the civil war. Geagea, who was served 11 years of a life sentence in solitary confinement below the Ministry of Defense building in Beirut, was granted amnesty by the newly elected Lebanese Parliament in 2005, following the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon.

A circulation appeared yesterday in Beirut claiming that Geagea’s man in Zouk suburb, Bashir Yousef Matar, was distributing dirty money among local demonstrators in return for slogans against President Michel Aoun and Hezbollah, as well as deploying some armed groups in the neighborhood waiting for the agreed zero hour to fire at both army soldiers and demonstrators alike, blame the regime and Hezbollah for the attacks and instigate an armed deployment of party forces on the pretext of protecting the popular movement.

Although those claims could not be independently verified, they must have sent strong shivers down the spine of many Lebanese who are still paying the price of the country’s civil war and its political, economic and social ramifications. All four Lebanese Forces ministers in Hariri’s cabinet were instructed to hand in their resignations 19 October, as a reaction to popular uprising that broke out 17 days ago and have swept the country ever since. Geagea, once a supporter of General Aoun, now turned an opponent of the president, has been outspoken about his strong ties with Israel since the 1970 s, particularly during the reign of former Lebanese Phalanges leader and later President Bashir al Gemayel, assassinated in a booby-trapped car on 14 September 1984.

Other prominent political figures trying to ride the popular wave of protests in Lebanon include Former Justice Minister General Ashraf Rifi, in the Sunni stronghold of Tripoli, who masterminds and controls much of what goes on there, finance, arms and commands a hardline militia called “City Guards”. They also include Walid Jumblatt, the controversial fickle- nicknamed ‘ Chameleon’ for frequently changing his political colors and alliances – Druze warlord and leader of the Progressive Socialist Party who is most influential in the Chouf mountain region of Lebanon, close to the Syrian borders. Once a main ally of Syria during its 30-year presence in Lebanon, now one of Damascus’ arch enemy and, along with a number of Hariri’s hardline Sunni MP s, has been a main instigator and supporter of the Syrian, regional as well as international effort to topple the regime of President Bashar al Assad.

Lebanon is now at a crucial crossroad between a new start or going back to the era of insecurity and unrest. However, on the other bank of the country’s political river, joint forces of allied Christian, Shiite and chunks of minor ethnic and religious factions are keeping their guard, ready for an unwanted worst-case scenario, yet determined to prevent another civil war in which everyone, including tentative winners, is an eventual loser.

L'articolo Lebanon’s Revolt: Potential Spread of Violence and Bloodshed proviene da InsideOver.