Lebanon in the past year has emerged as the latest terrain where Islamist militants and terrorists have taken root and, literally, exploded onto the political landscape. The three-month-old battle in the Nahr al-Bared camp in North Lebanon, near Tripoli, is the most dramatic manifestation of this phenomenon, in this case pitting the Lebanese armed forces against a Salafist-Jihadist group that calls itself Fatah al-Islam. This battle appears to be nearing its end, but the war between such militants and their societies is in its early days.
The 30,000 or so Nahr al-Bared refugee camp residents long ago left the area for safer ground. The wives and children of the Fatah al-Islam fighters were evacuated a few days ago, and the remaining militants - anywhere between 50 and 100 is the general estimate - now seem ready for the final battle against the Lebanese Army. Fatah al-Islam has threatened to take the battle beyond the camp to other parts of Lebanon, and officials and analysts alike assume that sleeper cells and sympathizers are waiting to carry out attacks once they get the signal.
Fatah al-Islam fighters have already carried out attacks in other parts of Lebanon, including firing rockets into North Lebanon communities from Nahr al-Bared and bombing civilian targets in Mount Lebanon earlier this year. Their capabilities are not to be frowned upon. Everyone has been taken by surprise by the ability of the several hundred militants in Nahr al-Bared to continue fighting for three months and more, as well as by their logistical supply capability and technical proficiency. This is not your run-of-the-mill local terrorist cell that formed spontaneously in the afterglow of Osama bin Laden's grand and monstrous entry onto the world's ideological stage in September 2001. The Fatah al-Islam phenomenon raises important and urgent questions about the exact nature, provenance and implications of this sort of tightly organized group. This is the latest analytical challenge to those in the Middle East and abroad who spend their time trying to understand the political, social and religious currents that flow through this region and drive its politics and public opinion. It is vitally important not to get this one wrong, given the high stakes involved.
When faced with understanding other such challenges in recent decades, many Arabs and foreign colleagues alike have tended to focus on the surface manifestations and analytical superficialities of such phenomena - whether mainstream Arab nationalism, tribalism, or non-violent, Muslim Brotherhood-type Islamism, or more marginal and deviant drug-, militia-, warlord- and gang-based cultures. A new danger today is that our capacity to understand these movements for what they really represent may be clouded by the overarching ideological emotionalism that distorts the minds of both indigenous and Western actors. Many in the West allow themselves to see militant Salafist-Jihadists like Fatah al-Islam only through US President George W. Bush's "global war on terror," without sufficiently grasping the local and global root causes of radicalism - including American, British and other Western powers' policies - that are easily traceable in the modern history of the Middle East.
On the other hand, those in the Middle East who delight at any sign of indigenous resistance to American-European-Israeli-Arab regime dominance are prone to put up with Salafist-Jihadist criminality as an inevitable reaction to the many malaises of the modern Arab-Iranian-Muslim world. Neither approach is very useful and only condemns us all to more confrontation, destruction and death. We must understand correctly the root causes that drive the continuing proliferation of groups like Fatah al-Islam, if we hope to nip such criminality in the bud. This particular group will soon be defeated or killed in Nahr al-Bared, but what happens after that? Will their demise spur a reaction that generates new adherents to their cause? Can these groups be eliminated by military force? Are they playing by Bush's slightly fantastic "global war on terror" rules, or do they operate in a totally different universe according to other criteria?
Various Arab and Western scholars and journalists have examined some of these issues seriously in recent years, so we do not have to be either mystified or terrorized by the Salafist-Jihadist groups cropping up in Lebanon and other parts of the Middle East, Asia and, increasingly, Western Europe. In my next column I will explore some of the pertinent findings of three such scholars - French university professor and researcher Bernard Rougier, Washington-based Lebanese researcher Bilal Saab, and Swedish analyst Magnus Ranstorp - who have provided timely texts that help us clearly understand why and how Salafist-Jihadist movements proliferated in Lebanon in the past generation. Because their works are available in English, they offer the non-Arabic-speaking world excellent windows into a complex world defined by a constantly evolving mixture of politics, identity, religion and nationalism that is often misunderstood at home and abroad, or willfully distorted by foreign ideologues with an agenda.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Hamas: Abbas pursuiainst usng "scorched earth" policy ag
NABLUS, (PIC)-- The Hamas Movement has charged PA chief Mahmoud Abbas of pursuing a "scorched earth" policy against it in a bid to cut the road before any possible return to dialogue between him and Hamas. The Movement in a statement said that the illegitimate government of Salam Fayyad's decision closing down 103 charitable societies was an attempt to restrict the Palestinians to receiving aid from the West, which is always conditional to political concessions.
It said that depriving the Palestinian people in the West Bank from those charitable societies that extended assistance to the families of martyrs, detainees, wounded, poor and the needy was meant to subdue the Palestinians into accepting political concessions.
Hamas affirmed that the Palestinian people would foil this decision to similar to past decisions.
In an earlier statement, Hamas warned the PA leadership in Ramallah of surrendering any of the detainees held in its prisons to the Israeli occupation.
It stressed that anyone involved in such a conspiracy would not escape punishment and asked them not to cross the red lines or else they should bear the consequences.
It said that depriving the Palestinian people in the West Bank from those charitable societies that extended assistance to the families of martyrs, detainees, wounded, poor and the needy was meant to subdue the Palestinians into accepting political concessions.
Hamas affirmed that the Palestinian people would foil this decision to similar to past decisions.
In an earlier statement, Hamas warned the PA leadership in Ramallah of surrendering any of the detainees held in its prisons to the Israeli occupation.
It stressed that anyone involved in such a conspiracy would not escape punishment and asked them not to cross the red lines or else they should bear the consequences.
Crack down on Gaza now
When the radical Islamist Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in June, several commentators concluded that since the organization's primary concern was consolidating its rule, it would try to reach a long-term truce with Israel. In accordance with this rationale, Hamas would be more flexible on a deal to free the abducted soldier, Gilad Schalit, and would refrain from attacking Israel. Neither scenario materialized.
In reality, Hamas is not signaling moderation, but continuous violent struggle against the Jewish State. The organization is waging a limited war against Israel and preparing for an escalation in the conflict. Kassam rocket attacks have intensified, and work continues on extending the range of the rocket. Infiltration attempts by terrorists into Israel have also grown.
Palestinian mortars have even targeted the crossing points into Gaza used for transferring much-needed food and fuel into the Strip. Additional tunnels have been dug, and arms smuggling has reached a peak since Hamas took control of Gaza. Furthermore, Hamas sends hundreds of its men to Iran for advanced training. And Hamas has significantly enhanced its military capabilities across a range of areas.
WHILE ISRAEL has recently become slightly more active militarily in the Strip, it still shows unnecessary restraint. The fears that a large-scale ground attack in Gaza might be costly in casualties are exaggerated. It's an assumption which needs reassessment. Similar arguments were voiced against a large-scale invasion of Judea and Samaria before Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, and they were proven wrong.
Gaza has yet to be subjected to an Operation Defensive Shield-like military treatment, and this is why the level of violence emanating from Gaza is so high. Moreover, delay in addressing the Hamas challenge might prove more costly in the future, as our experience with Hizbullah in Lebanon has clearly shown.
STRATEGICALLY, Israel's reluctance to commit troops in battle to deal with Hamas aggression signals weakness. The widespread perception within the Arab world that Israeli society is extremely sensitive to the loss of human life invites enemy violence. It was largely this perception that motivated the Palestinian terror campaign against Israel in September 2000.
The "spider web" theory propagated by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah - that Israel's emphasis on the value of human life as well as its self-indulgent Western characteristics render it weak and vulnerable - are also based on this view.
Nowadays, in order to terrorize Israeli citizens, Gazans count on Israel's reluctance to employ land operations and attack targets in dense population areas.
ISRAELI POLICY should signal that life on the Palestinian side of the border will be invariably affected by Palestinian violence intent on deteriorating the quality of life on Israel's side of the border. Palestinian dependence on Israel for electricity and water supply should be capitalized on to impress upon the Palestinians that reciprocity is the name of the game.
Israel has no obligation to the Palestinians if they are indiscriminately killing civilians and damaging valuable infrastructure. International law permits a military response, including artillery, aimed at the sources of fire, even if the fire is coming from urban areas. Israel should not hesitate to create a refugee wave by warning about impending fire on residential areas. Such tactics may result in a degree of Palestinian restraint.
Moreover, the international atmosphere is very conducive to an Israeli strike on Hamas-controlled Gaza. Hamas is largely ostracized by the international community, which wants to help Mahmoud Abbas restore the authority of the PA to the Gaza Strip. Anything Israel does to weaken Hamas' grip on Gaza will be viewed with understanding.
Abbas himself and his impotent coterie are quietly expecting that Israel will act to erode the control of the Hamas regime. Similarly, the so-called moderate Arab states will hardly be displeased if Hamas is weakened by Israel. The Hamas takeover of Gaza was a great shock for them as it encouraged Islamic opposition groups in their own countries.
FINALLY, the US may be expecting Israel to land a blow on the radical Islamic regime. Jerusalem failed to deliver a victory against Hizbullah in the summer of 2006 and can ill afford to be again seen as ineffective. Moreover, if the West is serious about establishing a united front against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Gaza is a good place to start.
Regime change should not, however, be the goal of the inevitable Israeli military onslaught in Gaza. Israel can weaken Hamas, but it cannot impose an Arab ruler over the 1.5 million Gazans. It is beyond the power of Israel, or of any Western outsider, to influence the social and political dynamics of the Gaza Strip. Reoccupation of Gaza is, therefore, also not recommended.
Israel's goal should be merely defensive - to destroy Gazan capabilities to harm Israel.
This means our temporary presence in all places where such capabilities are developed; their destruction and, after the evacuation of Gaza, systematic surgical strikes against reemerging terrorist cells.
The model for Israeli military activity in Gaza should be the successful way Israel deals with the terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria.
The writer is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.
In reality, Hamas is not signaling moderation, but continuous violent struggle against the Jewish State. The organization is waging a limited war against Israel and preparing for an escalation in the conflict. Kassam rocket attacks have intensified, and work continues on extending the range of the rocket. Infiltration attempts by terrorists into Israel have also grown.
Palestinian mortars have even targeted the crossing points into Gaza used for transferring much-needed food and fuel into the Strip. Additional tunnels have been dug, and arms smuggling has reached a peak since Hamas took control of Gaza. Furthermore, Hamas sends hundreds of its men to Iran for advanced training. And Hamas has significantly enhanced its military capabilities across a range of areas.
WHILE ISRAEL has recently become slightly more active militarily in the Strip, it still shows unnecessary restraint. The fears that a large-scale ground attack in Gaza might be costly in casualties are exaggerated. It's an assumption which needs reassessment. Similar arguments were voiced against a large-scale invasion of Judea and Samaria before Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, and they were proven wrong.
Gaza has yet to be subjected to an Operation Defensive Shield-like military treatment, and this is why the level of violence emanating from Gaza is so high. Moreover, delay in addressing the Hamas challenge might prove more costly in the future, as our experience with Hizbullah in Lebanon has clearly shown.
STRATEGICALLY, Israel's reluctance to commit troops in battle to deal with Hamas aggression signals weakness. The widespread perception within the Arab world that Israeli society is extremely sensitive to the loss of human life invites enemy violence. It was largely this perception that motivated the Palestinian terror campaign against Israel in September 2000.
The "spider web" theory propagated by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah - that Israel's emphasis on the value of human life as well as its self-indulgent Western characteristics render it weak and vulnerable - are also based on this view.
Nowadays, in order to terrorize Israeli citizens, Gazans count on Israel's reluctance to employ land operations and attack targets in dense population areas.
ISRAELI POLICY should signal that life on the Palestinian side of the border will be invariably affected by Palestinian violence intent on deteriorating the quality of life on Israel's side of the border. Palestinian dependence on Israel for electricity and water supply should be capitalized on to impress upon the Palestinians that reciprocity is the name of the game.
Israel has no obligation to the Palestinians if they are indiscriminately killing civilians and damaging valuable infrastructure. International law permits a military response, including artillery, aimed at the sources of fire, even if the fire is coming from urban areas. Israel should not hesitate to create a refugee wave by warning about impending fire on residential areas. Such tactics may result in a degree of Palestinian restraint.
Moreover, the international atmosphere is very conducive to an Israeli strike on Hamas-controlled Gaza. Hamas is largely ostracized by the international community, which wants to help Mahmoud Abbas restore the authority of the PA to the Gaza Strip. Anything Israel does to weaken Hamas' grip on Gaza will be viewed with understanding.
Abbas himself and his impotent coterie are quietly expecting that Israel will act to erode the control of the Hamas regime. Similarly, the so-called moderate Arab states will hardly be displeased if Hamas is weakened by Israel. The Hamas takeover of Gaza was a great shock for them as it encouraged Islamic opposition groups in their own countries.
FINALLY, the US may be expecting Israel to land a blow on the radical Islamic regime. Jerusalem failed to deliver a victory against Hizbullah in the summer of 2006 and can ill afford to be again seen as ineffective. Moreover, if the West is serious about establishing a united front against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Gaza is a good place to start.
Regime change should not, however, be the goal of the inevitable Israeli military onslaught in Gaza. Israel can weaken Hamas, but it cannot impose an Arab ruler over the 1.5 million Gazans. It is beyond the power of Israel, or of any Western outsider, to influence the social and political dynamics of the Gaza Strip. Reoccupation of Gaza is, therefore, also not recommended.
Israel's goal should be merely defensive - to destroy Gazan capabilities to harm Israel.
This means our temporary presence in all places where such capabilities are developed; their destruction and, after the evacuation of Gaza, systematic surgical strikes against reemerging terrorist cells.
The model for Israeli military activity in Gaza should be the successful way Israel deals with the terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria.
The writer is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.
The Palestinian Judenrate
Comment: The following is from an Arab news media outlet-notice how they "word smith" the activities of Hamas.
On Tuesday, 28 August, the American-backed Palestinian Authority (PA) regime in Ramallah decided to close down as many as 103 charities in the West Bank. The bulk of these modest societies are active in assisting the most impoverished sectors of the Palestinian people with money and food stuff to help them survive repressive Israeli measures such as prolonged curfews, blockades and imposed unemployment.
The charities also extend a helping hand to poor families whose breadwinners have been killed or are imprisoned by the Israeli occupiers in connection with the resistance or political opposition to the occupation.
Despite vociferous denials from Ramallah, the draconian measure is widely believed to be a message of compliance with instructions to that effect from Washington which has been incessantly calling for dismantling these charities and similar institutions in order to weaken Hamas and undermine its popularity.
It is really lamentable to see the PA regime strive to outmatch the Israeli occupation army in repressing the Palestinian populace.
In fact, the Israeli army itself, which controls every town, village, hamlet and refugee camp in the West Bank, has actually refrained from taking such a sweeping measure. Hence, one would wonder if the mass closure of these charities is primarily intended to demonstrate to the Israeli occupiers that the Ramallah government can “do the job” rather superbly on Israel’s behalf.
It is really difficult to imagine any constructive purpose in this stupid and harsh feat which caused even the Israelis to raise their eyebrows.
After all these charities enhance the welfare of many poor people who otherwise would form a large army of beggars in the streets and alleys of occupied Palestine.
So, does the unelected Fayad government want these people to become an easy prey for the Shin Beth which would feed them or give them a few shekels in exchange for recruiting them as informers, agents, fifth columnists and traitors acting against the interests of their own people?
Well, wouldn’t that be the ultimate outcome of such a callous act? Otherwise, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wouldn’t have publicly thanked, rather wholeheartedly, PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas for the closures when the two met in West Jerusalem on 28 August.
The paragons of mendacity in Ramallah have been at loss trying to justify the measure. They claimed that these charities didn’t have valid licenses and that their heads didn’t submit regular reports detailing their finances?
Well, did Suha Arafat submit a detailed report about the present state of her finances? Did Muhamed Rashid? Did Nabil Amr? Did Jamil and Jamal Tarifi? Indeed, Did Muhammad Dhalan submit a detailed report on his finances?
These questions are for misters Abbas and Fayad to answer now, not tomorrow, and without any evasion or prevarication.
Besides, what laws these corrupt ignoramuses are talking about? What the hell are they talking about? Are they so blind that they can’t see the Israeli occupation tanks and jeeps deployed outside their own bedrooms? Do they really think they have a sovereign state?
So tell us Mr. Fayad, are we supposed to get permission from the Nazi-like Israeli regime to be able to feed a starving child in Hebron or a starving widow in Nablus?
Do we have to ask for an Israeli permission to buy a school kit for a small boy in Dura whose father is languishing for years at the Kitziot concentration camp in the heart of Negev desert, without charge or trial? Do we have to obtain an Israeli permission for helping an orphaned bride have a dignified wedding because her family is too poor to pay for the expenses?
Needless to say, a government that torments its own people, knowingly and deliberately on behalf of its enemy is a treacherous government par excellence.
During the Second World War, the Nazis created the so-called “Jewish councils” or Judenrate, to carry out Nazi policies and decrees concerning Jewish communities. The Judenrate thought that they were helping persecuted Jews survive the plight of systematic Nazi persecution. However, as days passed, it became crystal clear that the Judenrate were being used by the Nazis as a mere tool for effecting the genocidal goals of the Third Reich.
Similarly, the PA government may delude itself into thinking that it is serving the national interests of the Palestinian people by pleasing and appeasing Israel and its guardian-ally, the United States.
However, it should be clear to every Palestinian that the role being played, so faithfully and even enthusiastically, by the Ramallah regime only serves the ultimate Zionist strategy of weakening and starving the Palestinian people in order to break their collective will to survive Israel’s genocidal designs.
My God, when will these stupid ignoramuses wake up from their slumber?
On Tuesday, 28 August, the American-backed Palestinian Authority (PA) regime in Ramallah decided to close down as many as 103 charities in the West Bank. The bulk of these modest societies are active in assisting the most impoverished sectors of the Palestinian people with money and food stuff to help them survive repressive Israeli measures such as prolonged curfews, blockades and imposed unemployment.
The charities also extend a helping hand to poor families whose breadwinners have been killed or are imprisoned by the Israeli occupiers in connection with the resistance or political opposition to the occupation.
Despite vociferous denials from Ramallah, the draconian measure is widely believed to be a message of compliance with instructions to that effect from Washington which has been incessantly calling for dismantling these charities and similar institutions in order to weaken Hamas and undermine its popularity.
It is really lamentable to see the PA regime strive to outmatch the Israeli occupation army in repressing the Palestinian populace.
In fact, the Israeli army itself, which controls every town, village, hamlet and refugee camp in the West Bank, has actually refrained from taking such a sweeping measure. Hence, one would wonder if the mass closure of these charities is primarily intended to demonstrate to the Israeli occupiers that the Ramallah government can “do the job” rather superbly on Israel’s behalf.
It is really difficult to imagine any constructive purpose in this stupid and harsh feat which caused even the Israelis to raise their eyebrows.
After all these charities enhance the welfare of many poor people who otherwise would form a large army of beggars in the streets and alleys of occupied Palestine.
So, does the unelected Fayad government want these people to become an easy prey for the Shin Beth which would feed them or give them a few shekels in exchange for recruiting them as informers, agents, fifth columnists and traitors acting against the interests of their own people?
Well, wouldn’t that be the ultimate outcome of such a callous act? Otherwise, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wouldn’t have publicly thanked, rather wholeheartedly, PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas for the closures when the two met in West Jerusalem on 28 August.
The paragons of mendacity in Ramallah have been at loss trying to justify the measure. They claimed that these charities didn’t have valid licenses and that their heads didn’t submit regular reports detailing their finances?
Well, did Suha Arafat submit a detailed report about the present state of her finances? Did Muhamed Rashid? Did Nabil Amr? Did Jamil and Jamal Tarifi? Indeed, Did Muhammad Dhalan submit a detailed report on his finances?
These questions are for misters Abbas and Fayad to answer now, not tomorrow, and without any evasion or prevarication.
Besides, what laws these corrupt ignoramuses are talking about? What the hell are they talking about? Are they so blind that they can’t see the Israeli occupation tanks and jeeps deployed outside their own bedrooms? Do they really think they have a sovereign state?
So tell us Mr. Fayad, are we supposed to get permission from the Nazi-like Israeli regime to be able to feed a starving child in Hebron or a starving widow in Nablus?
Do we have to ask for an Israeli permission to buy a school kit for a small boy in Dura whose father is languishing for years at the Kitziot concentration camp in the heart of Negev desert, without charge or trial? Do we have to obtain an Israeli permission for helping an orphaned bride have a dignified wedding because her family is too poor to pay for the expenses?
Needless to say, a government that torments its own people, knowingly and deliberately on behalf of its enemy is a treacherous government par excellence.
During the Second World War, the Nazis created the so-called “Jewish councils” or Judenrate, to carry out Nazi policies and decrees concerning Jewish communities. The Judenrate thought that they were helping persecuted Jews survive the plight of systematic Nazi persecution. However, as days passed, it became crystal clear that the Judenrate were being used by the Nazis as a mere tool for effecting the genocidal goals of the Third Reich.
Similarly, the PA government may delude itself into thinking that it is serving the national interests of the Palestinian people by pleasing and appeasing Israel and its guardian-ally, the United States.
However, it should be clear to every Palestinian that the role being played, so faithfully and even enthusiastically, by the Ramallah regime only serves the ultimate Zionist strategy of weakening and starving the Palestinian people in order to break their collective will to survive Israel’s genocidal designs.
My God, when will these stupid ignoramuses wake up from their slumber?
Abbas new Jerusalem adviser wants to reopen Orient House
Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has appointed a special adviser on Jerusalem affairs, PA officials in Ramallah said Wednesday, indicating that Israel and the PA are now readying to grapple in earnest with the issue of the city's status. The officials told The Jerusalem Post the decision was taken ahead of November's US-sponsored Middle East peace conference, where Israel and the Palestinians are expected to focus on "fundamental" issues like Jerusalem, the borders of the future Palestinian state and the problem of the Palestinian refugees.
"The issue of Jerusalem is once again on the table," said one official. "That's why we need someone to be responsible for the Jerusalem portfolio and to prepare for the negotiations with Israel."
The Prime Minister's Office had no response to the report.
The new adviser is Adnan Husseini, the former director-general of the Waqf department in Jerusalem. Husseini served in the Waqf job for more than a decade before he was replaced earlier this year by Azzam al-Khatib.
Husseini belongs to one of Jerusalem's oldest and most important families. His late cousin, Faisal Husseini, was for many years the top PLO leader in the city until his sudden death in 2001.
The new adviser told the Post one of his first tasks would be to try to persuade Israel to reopen Palestinian institutions in the city that were closed down by Israel over the past seven years.
One of these institutions, Orient House, served as the unofficial headquarters of the PLO in Jerusalem. Orient House enjoyed the status of an unofficial diplomatic mission - a fact that angered many in Israel, especially as some foreign ministers insisted on holding talks there with leading Palestinian figures.
Israel had argued that the presence of Orient House and other PLO-linked institutions in the city were in violation of the Oslo Accords, which banned the Palestinians from conducting such activities in Israel. The closure of Orient House was followed by similar moves against at least a dozen PLO-affiliated institutions.
"Jerusalem is living without a soul in the absence of Palestinian institutions," Husseini said in an interview with the Post. "The people of Jerusalem have been suffering because of the closure of their institutions. Today, everyone realizes that Jerusalem can't exist without these institutions, which used to provide essential services to the public."
Husseini said he was prepared to meet with Israeli government officials to discuss the issue if the institutions and other matters related to the day-to-day affairs of the Arab residents.
"We are prepared to open even small windows with Israel," he said. "We are prepared to do anything to serve the interests of our people in Jerusalem and end their suffering."
Husseini appealed to Israel not to waste time with regards to discussing the issue of Jerusalem.
"We believe that we can reach a solution to the issue of Jerusalem," he said. "We hope the Israelis will wake up and realize the importance of the city to the Palestinians. Israel must accept the fact that we will never give up our claim to Jerusalem."
Husseini said Israel must also realize that peace can't be achieved without a solution to the issue of Jerusalem.
"There will be no Palestinian state without Jerusalem as its capital," he said. "This is a holy city and we want Israel to acknowledge this fact. Israel is mistaken if it thinks that the policy of driving the Palestinians out of the city can lead to peace. Peace can't be achieved by denying the rights of the others. Disrespect for others is a sign of weakness, not strength."
The Waqf department, which is in charge of the Islamic holy sites in the city, remained under the control of the Jordanians after the Six Day War in 1967. Attempts by the PA over the past 14 years to establish an alternative Waqf department have been thwarted by both Israel and Jordan.
Likud MK Yuval Steinitz on Wednesday said Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had proven his hypocrisy by negotiating Jerusalem's future with Abbas. He recalled campaigning for the Knesset with Olmert, who told people to vote for him because he left the Jerusalem mayoralty to defend Jerusalem from a position of power against those who wanted to divide it.
"Olmert is a prime minister with zero public support, waiting for a verdict from the police and the Winograd Commission, who is ready to divide Jerusalem and allow it to be destroyed to save his skin," Steinitz said.
Jerusalem Municipality spokesman Gidi Schmerling declined to comment Wednesday.
Pensioners Minister Rafi Eitan, who recently replaced Immigrant Absorption Minister Ya'acov Edri as minister for Jerusalem affairs, also declined to comment.
"The issue of Jerusalem is once again on the table," said one official. "That's why we need someone to be responsible for the Jerusalem portfolio and to prepare for the negotiations with Israel."
The Prime Minister's Office had no response to the report.
The new adviser is Adnan Husseini, the former director-general of the Waqf department in Jerusalem. Husseini served in the Waqf job for more than a decade before he was replaced earlier this year by Azzam al-Khatib.
Husseini belongs to one of Jerusalem's oldest and most important families. His late cousin, Faisal Husseini, was for many years the top PLO leader in the city until his sudden death in 2001.
The new adviser told the Post one of his first tasks would be to try to persuade Israel to reopen Palestinian institutions in the city that were closed down by Israel over the past seven years.
One of these institutions, Orient House, served as the unofficial headquarters of the PLO in Jerusalem. Orient House enjoyed the status of an unofficial diplomatic mission - a fact that angered many in Israel, especially as some foreign ministers insisted on holding talks there with leading Palestinian figures.
Israel had argued that the presence of Orient House and other PLO-linked institutions in the city were in violation of the Oslo Accords, which banned the Palestinians from conducting such activities in Israel. The closure of Orient House was followed by similar moves against at least a dozen PLO-affiliated institutions.
"Jerusalem is living without a soul in the absence of Palestinian institutions," Husseini said in an interview with the Post. "The people of Jerusalem have been suffering because of the closure of their institutions. Today, everyone realizes that Jerusalem can't exist without these institutions, which used to provide essential services to the public."
Husseini said he was prepared to meet with Israeli government officials to discuss the issue if the institutions and other matters related to the day-to-day affairs of the Arab residents.
"We are prepared to open even small windows with Israel," he said. "We are prepared to do anything to serve the interests of our people in Jerusalem and end their suffering."
Husseini appealed to Israel not to waste time with regards to discussing the issue of Jerusalem.
"We believe that we can reach a solution to the issue of Jerusalem," he said. "We hope the Israelis will wake up and realize the importance of the city to the Palestinians. Israel must accept the fact that we will never give up our claim to Jerusalem."
Husseini said Israel must also realize that peace can't be achieved without a solution to the issue of Jerusalem.
"There will be no Palestinian state without Jerusalem as its capital," he said. "This is a holy city and we want Israel to acknowledge this fact. Israel is mistaken if it thinks that the policy of driving the Palestinians out of the city can lead to peace. Peace can't be achieved by denying the rights of the others. Disrespect for others is a sign of weakness, not strength."
The Waqf department, which is in charge of the Islamic holy sites in the city, remained under the control of the Jordanians after the Six Day War in 1967. Attempts by the PA over the past 14 years to establish an alternative Waqf department have been thwarted by both Israel and Jordan.
Likud MK Yuval Steinitz on Wednesday said Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had proven his hypocrisy by negotiating Jerusalem's future with Abbas. He recalled campaigning for the Knesset with Olmert, who told people to vote for him because he left the Jerusalem mayoralty to defend Jerusalem from a position of power against those who wanted to divide it.
"Olmert is a prime minister with zero public support, waiting for a verdict from the police and the Winograd Commission, who is ready to divide Jerusalem and allow it to be destroyed to save his skin," Steinitz said.
Jerusalem Municipality spokesman Gidi Schmerling declined to comment Wednesday.
Pensioners Minister Rafi Eitan, who recently replaced Immigrant Absorption Minister Ya'acov Edri as minister for Jerusalem affairs, also declined to comment.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Peres slammed for pardoning teenager's killers
A day after President Shimon Peres agreed to cut short the life sentence of the five Israeli Arabs convicted of murdering teenager Danny Katz in the 1980s, Katz's mother blasted the president on Wednesday and bemoaned the lack of importance awarded to life sentences in the state of Israel.
Comment:Once again the court trumps decisions made and enacted upon-it trumps human rughts and trashes Israeli families impacted by these murders. Yes, disengenious of Peres when he says, "I understand your pain but ..." This is inauthentic,uncaring as one can get and this from a Peace Awardee!
Comment:Once again the court trumps decisions made and enacted upon-it trumps human rughts and trashes Israeli families impacted by these murders. Yes, disengenious of Peres when he says, "I understand your pain but ..." This is inauthentic,uncaring as one can get and this from a Peace Awardee!
'Hamas offers Abbas renewal of unity government'
Hamas was prepared to cede to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas control of PA institutions and bases in the Gaza Strip, in return for a renewal of the unity government, reforms in the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization] and reinstating the Palestinian parliament, Israel Radio quoted a report from the pan Arab daily Asharq Alawsat, Wednesday.
Comment: And you believe Fatah is honoring "we will not talk to Hamas?" And you think that Fatah is moderate and what else do you still believe...?
Comment: And you believe Fatah is honoring "we will not talk to Hamas?" And you think that Fatah is moderate and what else do you still believe...?
The Holy Land Foundation Case; What you are not hearing in
Did you hear this?
Aug 10, 2007: Yesterday ended the second full week of trial
testimony in the case against The Holy Land Foundation for Relief
& Development, once the largest Muslim charity in the United
States
After a lengthy investigation by U.S. federal
authorities that resulted in the organization's assets being
frozen in 2001, and the filing of a 42-count criminal indictment
in 2004, prosecutors have been methodically presenting their case
against the organization and seven named defendants in a downtown
Dallas, Texas courtroom.
Trial Watch, a special broadcast of The Homeland Security Report
hosted by Doug Hagmann, brings you important information about
the trial that is not being covered by the mainstream media.
Listen to Doug Hagmann - an investigator with over 20 years of
experience in civil and criminal cases - as he recaps the case
against the Muslim charity as presented by the prosecution,
carefully sorts through the mountain of evidence presented by the
prosecution linking the charity and the defendants to the Islamic
terrorist organization HAMAS. Doug Hagmann describes the
testimony of lead FBI agent Lara Burns in her presentation of
hundreds of documents that link HLF funding directly to HAMAS
terrorist operations in the Middle East . This segment of Trial
Watch identifies members of the Council on American Islamic
Relations (CAIR), including executive director Nihad Awad,
who is purported to have direct knowledge that the giant funding
apparatus known as the Holy Land Foundation was financing
terrorist operations in the Middle East.
Doug Hagmann also details the prosecution's linkage between a
named defendant in this case to a spiritual advisor to at least
two of the September 11, 2001
hijackers. Also detailed in this broadcast is the 1993 meeting
held in Philadelphia between U.S. based HAMAS members and CAIR's
executive director. The meeting was held to discuss ways to
improve funding for HAMAS, and derail the Oslo Peace Accords.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
A Muslim 'Mafia'?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, August 14, 2007
4:30 PM PT
Homeland Security: Forget everything you've been told about
"moderate" Muslim groups in America. New evidence that U.S.
prosecutors have revealed at a major terror trial exposes the
facade.
Exhibit No. 003-0085 is the most chilling. Translated from Arabic
by federal investigators in the case against the Holy Land
Foundation, an alleged Hamas front, the secret document outlines
a full-blown conspiracy by the major Muslim groups in America -
all of which are considered "mainstream" by the media.
In fact, they are part of the "Ikhwan," or Muslim Brotherhood,
the parent organization of Hamas, al-Qaida and other major
Islamic terror groups. They have conspired to infiltrate American
society with the purpose of undermining it and turning it into an
Islamic state.
Check out this quote from Page 7 of the 1991 document:
"The Ikwhan must understand that all their work in America is a
kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western
civilization from within and sabotaging their miserable house by
the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's
religion is made victorious over all religions."
Sounds like the latest screed from Osama bin Laden. But it comes
from the Muslim establishment in America.
The secret plan lists several Saudi-backed Muslim groups as
"friends" of the conspiracy.
They include the Islamic Society of North America - the umbrella
organization - and the North American Islamic Trust, which
controls most of the mosques in America and is the forerunner to
the Council on American-Islamic Relations, this country's most
visible Muslim-rights group.
All three have been cited as unindicted co-conspirators in the
case, with all three sharing membership in the Muslim
Brotherhood. Yet all have claimed, in the wake of 9/11, to be
moderate, even patriotic.
Another exhibit reveals their plan to create innocuous-sounding
"front groups" to hide their radical agenda.
Many in the media and politics have fallen for their deception
and helped bring them into the mainstream.
Now everyone knows the truth.
The Muslim establishment that publicly decries the radical fringe
- represented by Hamas and al-Qaida - may actually be a part of
it. The only difference is that they use words and money instead
of bombs to accomplish their subversive goals.
Over the past two decades they have constructed, with Saudi
money, an elaborate infrastructure of support for the bad guys -
right under our noses.
They even brag about putting "beehives" (Islamic centers) in
every major city.
These exhibits - which so far have been ignored by major media
outside the Dallas area, where the trial is under way -
completely blow the mainstream Muslim NGOs' cover as pro-American
moderates. Many, if not most, aren't.
This is their real agenda, spelled out in black and white. It
should help investigators build a RICO case to dismantle the
entire terror-support network in America.
Many have suspected it, but now we have proof that there is a
secret underworld operating inside America under the cover of
fronts with legitimate-sounding names.
It even uses charities to launder money for violent hits on
enemies. It's highly organized, with its own internal bylaws and
security to avoid monitoring from law enforcement.
Sounds like the Mafia.
But unlike the mob, this syndicate is religious in nature and
protected by political correctness.
More evidence like this should put an end to such nonsense.
Naomi Ragenspan>
Aug 10, 2007: Yesterday ended the second full week of trial
testimony in the case against The Holy Land Foundation for Relief
& Development, once the largest Muslim charity in the United
States
After a lengthy investigation by U.S. federal
authorities that resulted in the organization's assets being
frozen in 2001, and the filing of a 42-count criminal indictment
in 2004, prosecutors have been methodically presenting their case
against the organization and seven named defendants in a downtown
Dallas, Texas courtroom.
Trial Watch, a special broadcast of The Homeland Security Report
hosted by Doug Hagmann, brings you important information about
the trial that is not being covered by the mainstream media.
Listen to Doug Hagmann - an investigator with over 20 years of
experience in civil and criminal cases - as he recaps the case
against the Muslim charity as presented by the prosecution,
carefully sorts through the mountain of evidence presented by the
prosecution linking the charity and the defendants to the Islamic
terrorist organization HAMAS. Doug Hagmann describes the
testimony of lead FBI agent Lara Burns in her presentation of
hundreds of documents that link HLF funding directly to HAMAS
terrorist operations in the Middle East . This segment of Trial
Watch identifies members of the Council on American Islamic
Relations (CAIR), including executive director Nihad Awad,
who is purported to have direct knowledge that the giant funding
apparatus known as the Holy Land Foundation was financing
terrorist operations in the Middle East.
Doug Hagmann also details the prosecution's linkage between a
named defendant in this case to a spiritual advisor to at least
two of the September 11, 2001
hijackers. Also detailed in this broadcast is the 1993 meeting
held in Philadelphia between U.S. based HAMAS members and CAIR's
executive director. The meeting was held to discuss ways to
improve funding for HAMAS, and derail the Oslo Peace Accords.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
A Muslim 'Mafia'?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, August 14, 2007
4:30 PM PT
Homeland Security: Forget everything you've been told about
"moderate" Muslim groups in America. New evidence that U.S.
prosecutors have revealed at a major terror trial exposes the
facade.
Exhibit No. 003-0085 is the most chilling. Translated from Arabic
by federal investigators in the case against the Holy Land
Foundation, an alleged Hamas front, the secret document outlines
a full-blown conspiracy by the major Muslim groups in America -
all of which are considered "mainstream" by the media.
In fact, they are part of the "Ikhwan," or Muslim Brotherhood,
the parent organization of Hamas, al-Qaida and other major
Islamic terror groups. They have conspired to infiltrate American
society with the purpose of undermining it and turning it into an
Islamic state.
Check out this quote from Page 7 of the 1991 document:
"The Ikwhan must understand that all their work in America is a
kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western
civilization from within and sabotaging their miserable house by
the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's
religion is made victorious over all religions."
Sounds like the latest screed from Osama bin Laden. But it comes
from the Muslim establishment in America.
The secret plan lists several Saudi-backed Muslim groups as
"friends" of the conspiracy.
They include the Islamic Society of North America - the umbrella
organization - and the North American Islamic Trust, which
controls most of the mosques in America and is the forerunner to
the Council on American-Islamic Relations, this country's most
visible Muslim-rights group.
All three have been cited as unindicted co-conspirators in the
case, with all three sharing membership in the Muslim
Brotherhood. Yet all have claimed, in the wake of 9/11, to be
moderate, even patriotic.
Another exhibit reveals their plan to create innocuous-sounding
"front groups" to hide their radical agenda.
Many in the media and politics have fallen for their deception
and helped bring them into the mainstream.
Now everyone knows the truth.
The Muslim establishment that publicly decries the radical fringe
- represented by Hamas and al-Qaida - may actually be a part of
it. The only difference is that they use words and money instead
of bombs to accomplish their subversive goals.
Over the past two decades they have constructed, with Saudi
money, an elaborate infrastructure of support for the bad guys -
right under our noses.
They even brag about putting "beehives" (Islamic centers) in
every major city.
These exhibits - which so far have been ignored by major media
outside the Dallas area, where the trial is under way -
completely blow the mainstream Muslim NGOs' cover as pro-American
moderates. Many, if not most, aren't.
This is their real agenda, spelled out in black and white. It
should help investigators build a RICO case to dismantle the
entire terror-support network in America.
Many have suspected it, but now we have proof that there is a
secret underworld operating inside America under the cover of
fronts with legitimate-sounding names.
It even uses charities to launder money for violent hits on
enemies. It's highly organized, with its own internal bylaws and
security to avoid monitoring from law enforcement.
Sounds like the Mafia.
But unlike the mob, this syndicate is religious in nature and
protected by political correctness.
More evidence like this should put an end to such nonsense.
Naomi Ragenspan>
The EU precedent
For several days last week many thousands of Gaza residents had to make do without electricity. Had Israel switched off the power - most of which is generated by Israel - it is safe to assume that the international community would have been incensed. In fact, the process of blaming Israel had already been kick-started with news that fuel deliveries from Israel to Gaza were being suspended at the Nahal Oz crossing - because of warnings of an impending terror attack.
The fact that the lights had just then gone out in Gaza was automatically ascribed to Nahal Oz's closure. The Hamas-led Gaza regime rushed to make the link.
The Gaza Generating Company (GGC, which supplies less than a quarter of the Strip's power) idled three of its four generators, and its head, Rafik Malikha, summoned a press conference and pointed fingers at Israel: "We received no fuel for two days because Israel prevents vehicles from approaching the crossing," he declared.
Yet even as many observers bought into the Israel-to-blame line, Nahal Oz was reopened, but the Gaza blackout persisted. It emerged that the European Union was responsible.
EU donors, who foot the bill for Gaza's fuel purchases, accused Hamas of siphoning off the GGC's income to finance extraneous activities - the nature of which it is, unfortunately, not difficult to deduce.
The true story was presented, from Ramallah, by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. "After Hamas took over the electric company, it began collecting revenues from the population to fund its militia," he explained. "This in turn drove the EU to withhold its aid for providing fuel."
European resolve on this issue has proved fleeting, even though the EU caught Hamas red-handed. Some €20 million per month is again flowing into Gaza to finance fuel purchases for the GGC, without any reliable guarantees that some of this income won't be diverted for nefarious purposes.
The EU has now discontinued its sanctions, having received unspecified, and doubtless empty, "assurances" that Hamas will change course.
If this brief episode showed anything - apart from the knee-jerk alacrity to blame Israel for all Palestinian ills - it is that Hamas is as corrupt as it has accurately and resonantly accused Fatah of being. In the past it was Hamas that charged that Fatah was skimming off GGC earnings.
Hamas debt-collectors have for weeks been canvassing the Strip from door-to-door, ordering residents to immediately pay their electricity arrears - not to the company, but to Hamas. The fact that even the EU could no longer abide the duplicity and Gaza's gangster-style fund-raising speaks volumes.
The outage that kept much of Gaza not only darkened but also without water (since the pumping stations couldn't function) was caused by some of Gaza's best friends.
Albeit briefly, the EU didn't shy from shutting off the power to express its umbrage at being cheated. Israel, dreading adverse reaction from the EU, among others, fears doing the same even in self-defense.
Ironically, the Ashkelon power station that produces most of the Hamas bailiwick's power is regularly targeted by Kassam rockets. Sderot children are expected to go back to school in a few days' time despite the danger that their classrooms will be hit.
Yet while the EU resorted to collective punishment to demonstrate its anger at the abuse of its funds, Israel is wary of doing the same when lives are at stake.
Israel rightly does not want to create a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, or to directly exacerbate deterioration there - both because of international criticism and, more importantly, its own genuine concern for the well-being of ordinary people.
But the EU precedent only underlines how justified Israel would be in demanding, as a condition for continued supply of electricity to the Strip, a complete halt to the Kassam attacks, among other measures.
The EU's intervention represented a perfect opportunity for Israel to better explain to the international community what is at stake when Hamas abuses the world's ongoing efforts to help the Palestinians.
Sooner or later, if the rocket attacks continue and the terror networks flourish, Israel will be left with no choice but to apply such and other penalties, to prevent Hamas in Gaza from biting the Israeli hand that helps feed it.
Israel would do well to prepare the ground for such moves by drawing world attention to the EU's extraordinary measure, and to the cynical governance by Hamas that prompted it.
span>
The fact that the lights had just then gone out in Gaza was automatically ascribed to Nahal Oz's closure. The Hamas-led Gaza regime rushed to make the link.
The Gaza Generating Company (GGC, which supplies less than a quarter of the Strip's power) idled three of its four generators, and its head, Rafik Malikha, summoned a press conference and pointed fingers at Israel: "We received no fuel for two days because Israel prevents vehicles from approaching the crossing," he declared.
Yet even as many observers bought into the Israel-to-blame line, Nahal Oz was reopened, but the Gaza blackout persisted. It emerged that the European Union was responsible.
EU donors, who foot the bill for Gaza's fuel purchases, accused Hamas of siphoning off the GGC's income to finance extraneous activities - the nature of which it is, unfortunately, not difficult to deduce.
The true story was presented, from Ramallah, by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. "After Hamas took over the electric company, it began collecting revenues from the population to fund its militia," he explained. "This in turn drove the EU to withhold its aid for providing fuel."
European resolve on this issue has proved fleeting, even though the EU caught Hamas red-handed. Some €20 million per month is again flowing into Gaza to finance fuel purchases for the GGC, without any reliable guarantees that some of this income won't be diverted for nefarious purposes.
The EU has now discontinued its sanctions, having received unspecified, and doubtless empty, "assurances" that Hamas will change course.
If this brief episode showed anything - apart from the knee-jerk alacrity to blame Israel for all Palestinian ills - it is that Hamas is as corrupt as it has accurately and resonantly accused Fatah of being. In the past it was Hamas that charged that Fatah was skimming off GGC earnings.
Hamas debt-collectors have for weeks been canvassing the Strip from door-to-door, ordering residents to immediately pay their electricity arrears - not to the company, but to Hamas. The fact that even the EU could no longer abide the duplicity and Gaza's gangster-style fund-raising speaks volumes.
The outage that kept much of Gaza not only darkened but also without water (since the pumping stations couldn't function) was caused by some of Gaza's best friends.
Albeit briefly, the EU didn't shy from shutting off the power to express its umbrage at being cheated. Israel, dreading adverse reaction from the EU, among others, fears doing the same even in self-defense.
Ironically, the Ashkelon power station that produces most of the Hamas bailiwick's power is regularly targeted by Kassam rockets. Sderot children are expected to go back to school in a few days' time despite the danger that their classrooms will be hit.
Yet while the EU resorted to collective punishment to demonstrate its anger at the abuse of its funds, Israel is wary of doing the same when lives are at stake.
Israel rightly does not want to create a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, or to directly exacerbate deterioration there - both because of international criticism and, more importantly, its own genuine concern for the well-being of ordinary people.
But the EU precedent only underlines how justified Israel would be in demanding, as a condition for continued supply of electricity to the Strip, a complete halt to the Kassam attacks, among other measures.
The EU's intervention represented a perfect opportunity for Israel to better explain to the international community what is at stake when Hamas abuses the world's ongoing efforts to help the Palestinians.
Sooner or later, if the rocket attacks continue and the terror networks flourish, Israel will be left with no choice but to apply such and other penalties, to prevent Hamas in Gaza from biting the Israeli hand that helps feed it.
Israel would do well to prepare the ground for such moves by drawing world attention to the EU's extraordinary measure, and to the cynical governance by Hamas that prompted it.
span>
The Coming War with Islam
Five years ago, I had a conversation with a young Palestinian student who in short precise terms explained how Islam will defeat the West. The conversation opened my eyes to a much larger picture in which Israel plays only a minor role in the Islamic game of conquest. Since then I tried to speak to some to Arabs who come to pray at the Mosque, but they were not as outspoken as the student.
Last week, I had another conversation with an Israeli Arab construction boss by the unlikely name of Francis who was in charge of building a villa near our house in Herzelia. He told me that his family was Christian, and his name was given to him in honor of the Franciscan monks. Our conversation was as interesting as the first conversation I had with the Arab student five years ago and I would like to share it with you. Francis frequently parked his car near our house and we would exchange polite greetings.
About a week ago, the water was shut off for repairs in the house he was building, and Francis asked me if I could give him some hot water for his coffee. He was a tall man of about forty, with reddish hair and blue eyes.
He spoke a perfect Hebrew, and I naturally became curious about him. I felt that he may the right person to exchange some views with. By his looks, I assumed that he was either a Druze or from the Syrian region. He looked more like a teacher than a construction worker and, as I later found out, he was actually a teacher by profession. Since my conversation with the student five years ago, I was always curious to hear their side of the story; therefore, I decided to invite him for a cup of coffee to our house. I saw him hesitate for a moment; then he smiled and thanked me for my hospitality.
While we drank our coffee, he told me that he was from a small village in the Galilee called Jish, near the present Kibbutz Sassa. I remembered the village very well as I was one of the soldiers who captured the village while serving in the 7th Armored brigade during the War of Independence in 1948. I decided not to tell him about it because at the time we encountered some stiff resistance at that village and quite a few of the inhabitants were killed.
He went on to tell me a little about himself. “For a while I was a teacher and I loved teaching, but I couldn’t make a living at it and I decided to join my father-in-law who is in the construction business.” Judging by the large Honda he was driving, I figured that he didn’t do too badly changing his profession.
Our conversation soon turned to the present situation in the Middle East, about Hamas winning the elections, the situation of the Israeli Arabs, and the last Lebanese war against Hezbollah. “As Christians we are in a difficult situation here in Israel. Unfortunately, the Moslems and especially the extreme Islamist section, are giving the tone here. My family who lived in Bethlehem probably since the Crusaders, had to flee for their life. The
Moslems have been forcing us out, by threats and even murder. Bethlehem that was once predominantly Christian is now predominantly Moslem. Very little is written about it even in the Israeli press.”
He sipped his coffee and gave me a long look. He seemed like someone who wasn’t quite sure whether to say what he was about to say. I gave him an encouraging nod.
“I have to tell you something which very few of you seem to comprehend.” He continued, “Your bungling war against a few thousand Hezbollah fighters which you should have crushed no matter what, considering the importance of the outcome, has created a completely new situation, not only for this area, but globally. Your inept leadership totally misunderstood the importance of winning this war."
“As a matter of fact, the whole Moslem world, not only the Arabs, simply couldn’t believe that the mighty Israeli Army that defeated the combined Arab forces in six days in 1967, and almost captured Cairo and Damascus in 1973, couldn’t defeat a small army of Hezbollah men. As usual the Moslems see things the way they want to see things. Most think that the present generation of Israelis have gone soft and can be defeated."
“The American bungling of the war in Iraq only added to their conviction that victory not only over Israel but also over the West is not only possible, but certain. The ramifications of these two bungling wars may bring an Islamic bloody Tsunami all over the West, not only in Israel. The sharks smell blood and these two wars gave them the green light to attack sooner than they had in mind. Your problem is that you are on the defensive and they have the option to choose the time and the places when and where to attack and there is nothing much you can do about it. When will you Westerners realize that half measures don’t work with people who are willing to die by the thousands for Allah to achieve their goal? In their eyes the Western World is simply an abomination on earth that has to be wiped out.”
He spoke quietly and I could just picture him in the school giving his students a lecture. I poured him another cup of coffee and encouraged him to continue.
“The Americans, the Europeans, and even you Israelis really don’t know what it is all about, do you? During the last generation hundreds of thousands of children have been taught all over the Moslem world in Madrass schools to become martyrs for Allah in order to kill the infidels. These youngsters not only are ready to do it, but are actually in the process of doing it. Bombs are going off all over the world killing and maiming thousands of people, not only on 9/11 in the US, in London Madrid and Bali, but in Africa, India, Bengladesh, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and many other places. The first signs of the Islamic Tsunami is already here, but the West doesn’t understand, or doesn’t want to understand what is coming."
“The Americans, instead of realizing that this is as bad as World War Two, or even worse, are going to pull out of Iraq, handing it over to Iran on a silver platter. Next may come the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf states. When dirty bombs go off all over Western towns, who is going to stop the Iranians?"
“Now is the time to stop them, not only because they are developing nuclear bombs, but because Iran has become the base for all Islamic terrorist. They supply money, men and weapons to Islamic terrorist around the world, quite often through their diplomatic mail. Billions of petro-dollars that are pouring into Iran are being funneled into terrorist organizations world-wide. They believe, and perhaps rightly so, that the West will do nothing to stop them in achieving their goals. Is history repeating itself? Are the Iranians making the same mistake that Hitler made when he attacked Poland? Is the situation similar?"
“As a history teacher who studied the subject thoroughly I can tell you that Western victory in World War Two was not all certain. Hitler could have won the war if he would have gone ahead with the atomic bomb development before the Americans. The Germans began working on it in the thirties, and it was Hitler’s decision to prefer building more conventional arms, as he considered atomic weapons sheer fantasy. Hitler made the wrong decision, but had he made the right decision the world would have been a different type of world today, wouldn’t it? The West won the war against Hitler by sheer chance. Very few people seem to realize that.”
I must say that his last words shook me up quite a bit. Had Hitler made a different decision, I would have died in Dachau, there wouldn’t have been a Jewish state called Israel, and most likely there wouldn’t have been any Jews left in the world. The idea that the Western democracies in general and the fate of the Jewish people in particular could have hinged on Hitler’s one decision, is a scenario of the worst nightmare.
He notices that his last words had an effect on me, and he smiled. “I see that my words are not wasted on you,” he said dryly. I nodded, and he continued with his lecture. “Coming back to our time, the Iranians rely on the West doing nothing about their development of nuclear bombs. They also rely on their secret weapon: an inexhaustible supply of Islamic suicide bombers, some of them are already planted all over the Western World.
Besides the Islamic countries that supply these suicide bombers, a second front has been opened, and that is the Internet with more than five thousand Islamic web sites, brain washing and urging young Moslems to become martyrs for Allah. They especially target young Moslems who live in Europe and the West in general. The Western intelligence authorities consider these web sites a bigger threat than the Iranian atomic bomb. Al-Qaeda recently issued a television broadcast that promised a devastating attack against its enemies this spring. As we all know, Al-Qaeda doesn’t make empty threats."
“Actually, I don’t understand why the Iranians bother to develop atomic bombs and bring the whole world down on them. Every suicide bomber is a potential atomic bomb, or a biological, chemical or dirty bomb that can be no less devastating than an atom bomb. The Americans and Europeans have no defense against this type of war."
“What can we do against this type warfare?” I asked him. “Well, you Israelis, should better prepare yourself for another round against Hezbollah. It will not be long in coming. It depends on the Iranians to give the word. This time you will have to destroy Hezbollah no matter what the cost may be."
“Of course, your next round against Hezbollah may involve the Syrians and the Iranians against you. The Iranians declared that they will not allow Hezbollah to be defeated no matter what and may launch their missiles against you. So will the Syrians. What will Israel do? It is unlikely that Israel will accept its destruction and may use their nuclear arsenal if the West will not come to their help. Perhaps our book of Revelation is not so wrong in describing that the end of the world would start at Armageddon, which we know as Har-Megiddo in Israel.
The book of Revelations describe the last battle would be fought at Armageddon between the “Forces of good and the forces of evil.”
“And who would you call the forces of good ‘Israel or Islam?’ I asked looking him straight in the eyes. He gave me a startled look. “If I were a Moslem, I would have no problem to name the forces of good and it wouldn’t be Israel. As a Christian, I would probably name Israel, but as a Christian Arab I would prefer not to answer.”
We looked at each other. His answer made it clear where the Israeli Arabs stood, whether they were Moslems or Christians. And why should I be surprised? After all the Israeli Arabs call the establishment of the State of Israel their nakbah (disaster).
Is there a way to avoid the “Armageddon”?
“I think there are two ways to avoid it. One can be a major war which the West can win. As in World War Two, had the West attacked the Germans in 1936 the war would have lasted not more than a month with very few casualties. Their procrastination resulted in World War II with all its consequences. Eventually, the West will have to tackle the Iranians, it is better that they do it now to avert a world catastrophe later. With Iran defeated the Islamic onslaught will lose its base, and it may be the turning point in history to defeat the menace of extreme Islam. The majority of the Moslems don’t want this confrontation anyway.”
“You are painting a rather dark picture. When do you think we will have the next round against Hezbollah?” I asked. “I think they will attack again as soon as they are fully re-equipped and I think it will be during the summer, while Israel is still in a military and political turmoil.”
For a while, we sat in silence. He finished his second cup of coffee and got up. “I know what I am going to do. I am going to Canada to join my brother. This country is becoming much too dangerous for Christians as well,” he said. He thanked me for the coffee and we shook hands.
“You said there are two ways to avoid Armageddon?” I remembered to ask him.
“Sure, all the West has to do is follow Putin’s ways. He assassinates his enemies without blinking an eye.
Assassinate the four or five Mullahs who run the show, Ahmadinejad, and a few more Iranian fanatics, and the War can be avoided. It may be difficult to do, but not impossible. With today’s hi- tech technology I am sure that new weapons against individuals are being prepared right now. I think it would be a better way of handling the matter than an all out war against Islam.”
The conversation with Francis was not more encouraging than the one I had with the Palestinian student five years ago. It was becoming clear that Israel may be on the forefront for the coming war of the West against Islam, unless we follow Francis’ suggestion to assassinate the heads of the snake, rather than going to war with Islam.
span>
Last week, I had another conversation with an Israeli Arab construction boss by the unlikely name of Francis who was in charge of building a villa near our house in Herzelia. He told me that his family was Christian, and his name was given to him in honor of the Franciscan monks. Our conversation was as interesting as the first conversation I had with the Arab student five years ago and I would like to share it with you. Francis frequently parked his car near our house and we would exchange polite greetings.
About a week ago, the water was shut off for repairs in the house he was building, and Francis asked me if I could give him some hot water for his coffee. He was a tall man of about forty, with reddish hair and blue eyes.
He spoke a perfect Hebrew, and I naturally became curious about him. I felt that he may the right person to exchange some views with. By his looks, I assumed that he was either a Druze or from the Syrian region. He looked more like a teacher than a construction worker and, as I later found out, he was actually a teacher by profession. Since my conversation with the student five years ago, I was always curious to hear their side of the story; therefore, I decided to invite him for a cup of coffee to our house. I saw him hesitate for a moment; then he smiled and thanked me for my hospitality.
While we drank our coffee, he told me that he was from a small village in the Galilee called Jish, near the present Kibbutz Sassa. I remembered the village very well as I was one of the soldiers who captured the village while serving in the 7th Armored brigade during the War of Independence in 1948. I decided not to tell him about it because at the time we encountered some stiff resistance at that village and quite a few of the inhabitants were killed.
He went on to tell me a little about himself. “For a while I was a teacher and I loved teaching, but I couldn’t make a living at it and I decided to join my father-in-law who is in the construction business.” Judging by the large Honda he was driving, I figured that he didn’t do too badly changing his profession.
Our conversation soon turned to the present situation in the Middle East, about Hamas winning the elections, the situation of the Israeli Arabs, and the last Lebanese war against Hezbollah. “As Christians we are in a difficult situation here in Israel. Unfortunately, the Moslems and especially the extreme Islamist section, are giving the tone here. My family who lived in Bethlehem probably since the Crusaders, had to flee for their life. The
Moslems have been forcing us out, by threats and even murder. Bethlehem that was once predominantly Christian is now predominantly Moslem. Very little is written about it even in the Israeli press.”
He sipped his coffee and gave me a long look. He seemed like someone who wasn’t quite sure whether to say what he was about to say. I gave him an encouraging nod.
“I have to tell you something which very few of you seem to comprehend.” He continued, “Your bungling war against a few thousand Hezbollah fighters which you should have crushed no matter what, considering the importance of the outcome, has created a completely new situation, not only for this area, but globally. Your inept leadership totally misunderstood the importance of winning this war."
“As a matter of fact, the whole Moslem world, not only the Arabs, simply couldn’t believe that the mighty Israeli Army that defeated the combined Arab forces in six days in 1967, and almost captured Cairo and Damascus in 1973, couldn’t defeat a small army of Hezbollah men. As usual the Moslems see things the way they want to see things. Most think that the present generation of Israelis have gone soft and can be defeated."
“The American bungling of the war in Iraq only added to their conviction that victory not only over Israel but also over the West is not only possible, but certain. The ramifications of these two bungling wars may bring an Islamic bloody Tsunami all over the West, not only in Israel. The sharks smell blood and these two wars gave them the green light to attack sooner than they had in mind. Your problem is that you are on the defensive and they have the option to choose the time and the places when and where to attack and there is nothing much you can do about it. When will you Westerners realize that half measures don’t work with people who are willing to die by the thousands for Allah to achieve their goal? In their eyes the Western World is simply an abomination on earth that has to be wiped out.”
He spoke quietly and I could just picture him in the school giving his students a lecture. I poured him another cup of coffee and encouraged him to continue.
“The Americans, the Europeans, and even you Israelis really don’t know what it is all about, do you? During the last generation hundreds of thousands of children have been taught all over the Moslem world in Madrass schools to become martyrs for Allah in order to kill the infidels. These youngsters not only are ready to do it, but are actually in the process of doing it. Bombs are going off all over the world killing and maiming thousands of people, not only on 9/11 in the US, in London Madrid and Bali, but in Africa, India, Bengladesh, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and many other places. The first signs of the Islamic Tsunami is already here, but the West doesn’t understand, or doesn’t want to understand what is coming."
“The Americans, instead of realizing that this is as bad as World War Two, or even worse, are going to pull out of Iraq, handing it over to Iran on a silver platter. Next may come the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf states. When dirty bombs go off all over Western towns, who is going to stop the Iranians?"
“Now is the time to stop them, not only because they are developing nuclear bombs, but because Iran has become the base for all Islamic terrorist. They supply money, men and weapons to Islamic terrorist around the world, quite often through their diplomatic mail. Billions of petro-dollars that are pouring into Iran are being funneled into terrorist organizations world-wide. They believe, and perhaps rightly so, that the West will do nothing to stop them in achieving their goals. Is history repeating itself? Are the Iranians making the same mistake that Hitler made when he attacked Poland? Is the situation similar?"
“As a history teacher who studied the subject thoroughly I can tell you that Western victory in World War Two was not all certain. Hitler could have won the war if he would have gone ahead with the atomic bomb development before the Americans. The Germans began working on it in the thirties, and it was Hitler’s decision to prefer building more conventional arms, as he considered atomic weapons sheer fantasy. Hitler made the wrong decision, but had he made the right decision the world would have been a different type of world today, wouldn’t it? The West won the war against Hitler by sheer chance. Very few people seem to realize that.”
I must say that his last words shook me up quite a bit. Had Hitler made a different decision, I would have died in Dachau, there wouldn’t have been a Jewish state called Israel, and most likely there wouldn’t have been any Jews left in the world. The idea that the Western democracies in general and the fate of the Jewish people in particular could have hinged on Hitler’s one decision, is a scenario of the worst nightmare.
He notices that his last words had an effect on me, and he smiled. “I see that my words are not wasted on you,” he said dryly. I nodded, and he continued with his lecture. “Coming back to our time, the Iranians rely on the West doing nothing about their development of nuclear bombs. They also rely on their secret weapon: an inexhaustible supply of Islamic suicide bombers, some of them are already planted all over the Western World.
Besides the Islamic countries that supply these suicide bombers, a second front has been opened, and that is the Internet with more than five thousand Islamic web sites, brain washing and urging young Moslems to become martyrs for Allah. They especially target young Moslems who live in Europe and the West in general. The Western intelligence authorities consider these web sites a bigger threat than the Iranian atomic bomb. Al-Qaeda recently issued a television broadcast that promised a devastating attack against its enemies this spring. As we all know, Al-Qaeda doesn’t make empty threats."
“Actually, I don’t understand why the Iranians bother to develop atomic bombs and bring the whole world down on them. Every suicide bomber is a potential atomic bomb, or a biological, chemical or dirty bomb that can be no less devastating than an atom bomb. The Americans and Europeans have no defense against this type of war."
“What can we do against this type warfare?” I asked him. “Well, you Israelis, should better prepare yourself for another round against Hezbollah. It will not be long in coming. It depends on the Iranians to give the word. This time you will have to destroy Hezbollah no matter what the cost may be."
“Of course, your next round against Hezbollah may involve the Syrians and the Iranians against you. The Iranians declared that they will not allow Hezbollah to be defeated no matter what and may launch their missiles against you. So will the Syrians. What will Israel do? It is unlikely that Israel will accept its destruction and may use their nuclear arsenal if the West will not come to their help. Perhaps our book of Revelation is not so wrong in describing that the end of the world would start at Armageddon, which we know as Har-Megiddo in Israel.
The book of Revelations describe the last battle would be fought at Armageddon between the “Forces of good and the forces of evil.”
“And who would you call the forces of good ‘Israel or Islam?’ I asked looking him straight in the eyes. He gave me a startled look. “If I were a Moslem, I would have no problem to name the forces of good and it wouldn’t be Israel. As a Christian, I would probably name Israel, but as a Christian Arab I would prefer not to answer.”
We looked at each other. His answer made it clear where the Israeli Arabs stood, whether they were Moslems or Christians. And why should I be surprised? After all the Israeli Arabs call the establishment of the State of Israel their nakbah (disaster).
Is there a way to avoid the “Armageddon”?
“I think there are two ways to avoid it. One can be a major war which the West can win. As in World War Two, had the West attacked the Germans in 1936 the war would have lasted not more than a month with very few casualties. Their procrastination resulted in World War II with all its consequences. Eventually, the West will have to tackle the Iranians, it is better that they do it now to avert a world catastrophe later. With Iran defeated the Islamic onslaught will lose its base, and it may be the turning point in history to defeat the menace of extreme Islam. The majority of the Moslems don’t want this confrontation anyway.”
“You are painting a rather dark picture. When do you think we will have the next round against Hezbollah?” I asked. “I think they will attack again as soon as they are fully re-equipped and I think it will be during the summer, while Israel is still in a military and political turmoil.”
For a while, we sat in silence. He finished his second cup of coffee and got up. “I know what I am going to do. I am going to Canada to join my brother. This country is becoming much too dangerous for Christians as well,” he said. He thanked me for the coffee and we shook hands.
“You said there are two ways to avoid Armageddon?” I remembered to ask him.
“Sure, all the West has to do is follow Putin’s ways. He assassinates his enemies without blinking an eye.
Assassinate the four or five Mullahs who run the show, Ahmadinejad, and a few more Iranian fanatics, and the War can be avoided. It may be difficult to do, but not impossible. With today’s hi- tech technology I am sure that new weapons against individuals are being prepared right now. I think it would be a better way of handling the matter than an all out war against Islam.”
The conversation with Francis was not more encouraging than the one I had with the Palestinian student five years ago. It was becoming clear that Israel may be on the forefront for the coming war of the West against Islam, unless we follow Francis’ suggestion to assassinate the heads of the snake, rather than going to war with Islam.
span>
'Durban II' is being discredited, Pakistan warns
Pakistan accused UN watchdog groups on Monday of launching a "smear campaign" to discredit the upcoming 2009 UN anti-racism conference. The vitriolic attacks against Jews and Israel that dominated the last such conference held in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, had caused UN watchdog groups as well as officials from Israel and the US to express early concern about the 2009 follow up meeting, dubbed "Durban II." The watchdog groups have warned that the seeds of a repeat performance have already been sown.
But Pakistan's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Masood Khan, dismissed those fears as he addressed the opening session Monday of the week long pre-planning meeting held in Geneva.
"How to deal with the smear campaign against the Durban Review Conference," designed to discredit the past and future work on these issues is one of the challenges facing this week's meeting, Khan said.
"The PrepCom leadership and members should stay the course and not be distracted by negative propaganda," Khan said as he spoke to a gathering in which all 192 UN member countries have voting rights.
Israel and the US were present but have chosen to keep a low profile at this week's meeting out of fear that it would stray from its lofty goals of combating racism.
Hillel Neuer, executive-director of the Geneva-based UN Watch, told The Jerusalem Post he viewed Pakistan's statement as a direct attack.
"They are trying to intimidate us from speaking truth to power."
He added, "We will not be intimidated."
Neuer and representatives of other watchdog groups said that even on the first day of the pre-planning conference they were concerned by what they heard.
"It went from bad to worse," said Anne Bayefsky of the New York-based group Eye on the UN as she spoke with the Post about the day's events.
As expected, Libya was elected to chair the 20 country planning bureau for 2009, which includes Iran, in the opening meeting. Although the bureau had already met 19 times in the last two months in preparation for this week's event, its membership was only ratified on Monday.
In addition, Cuba was voted in as vice chair and the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Louise Arbour is to be its secretary-general.
Neuer attacked the election results and said that "Choosing Libya and Iran to fight racism is like choosing Jack the Ripper to fight sexual harassment." He added that it was a setback "for the human rights movement as a whole."
Still, most of the speeches delivered by the bureau and other UN member countries focused in global terms on the need to combat racism, xenophobia and related intolerances and did not address anti-Semitism per se.
The conflict in the Middle East was mentioned a number of times, in statements by Pakistan and Egypt, but it was not the overwhelming focus of the meeting.
Speaking in the name of the Organization of Islamic Countries, Pakistan's Khan said, "The conference should move the spotlight on to the continued plight of the Palestinian people and non-recognition of their inalienable right to self determination."
Egypt noted that the violations which have arisen from the "the continued occupation of Palestine" have been condemned and examined by the international community.
Both countries, along with Iran, called attention to the new problems relating to the defamation of religion, particularly Islamophobia.
"Today the defamation of Islam and discrimination against Muslims represents the most conspicuous demonstration of contemporary racism and intolerance.
"In this regard the most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia," said Khan.
It is regrettable that the media has allowed this kind of defamation, Khan said.
Iran's Ambassador to the UN, S.M.K. Sajjadpour, said the prejudice extended to the "unlawful prohibition of visible signs of religion and culture in the schools" such as a prohibition on the head scarf which Muslim girls and women wear for religious reasons.
Members of all three countries also spoke of racial profiling and the prejudice that has arisen from the fight against terrorism in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attack on the twin towers in New York.
This attack sowed tensions and instability across the world, said Egypt's representative.
"The aftermath of this tragic event saw a new and dangerous phenomenon in incitement to racial and religious hatred. An example in this regard were the highly defamatory cartoons published by a Danish newspaper in 2005 which deeply hurt over a billion Muslims around the world," the Egyptian representative said.
span>
But Pakistan's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Masood Khan, dismissed those fears as he addressed the opening session Monday of the week long pre-planning meeting held in Geneva.
"How to deal with the smear campaign against the Durban Review Conference," designed to discredit the past and future work on these issues is one of the challenges facing this week's meeting, Khan said.
"The PrepCom leadership and members should stay the course and not be distracted by negative propaganda," Khan said as he spoke to a gathering in which all 192 UN member countries have voting rights.
Israel and the US were present but have chosen to keep a low profile at this week's meeting out of fear that it would stray from its lofty goals of combating racism.
Hillel Neuer, executive-director of the Geneva-based UN Watch, told The Jerusalem Post he viewed Pakistan's statement as a direct attack.
"They are trying to intimidate us from speaking truth to power."
He added, "We will not be intimidated."
Neuer and representatives of other watchdog groups said that even on the first day of the pre-planning conference they were concerned by what they heard.
"It went from bad to worse," said Anne Bayefsky of the New York-based group Eye on the UN as she spoke with the Post about the day's events.
As expected, Libya was elected to chair the 20 country planning bureau for 2009, which includes Iran, in the opening meeting. Although the bureau had already met 19 times in the last two months in preparation for this week's event, its membership was only ratified on Monday.
In addition, Cuba was voted in as vice chair and the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Louise Arbour is to be its secretary-general.
Neuer attacked the election results and said that "Choosing Libya and Iran to fight racism is like choosing Jack the Ripper to fight sexual harassment." He added that it was a setback "for the human rights movement as a whole."
Still, most of the speeches delivered by the bureau and other UN member countries focused in global terms on the need to combat racism, xenophobia and related intolerances and did not address anti-Semitism per se.
The conflict in the Middle East was mentioned a number of times, in statements by Pakistan and Egypt, but it was not the overwhelming focus of the meeting.
Speaking in the name of the Organization of Islamic Countries, Pakistan's Khan said, "The conference should move the spotlight on to the continued plight of the Palestinian people and non-recognition of their inalienable right to self determination."
Egypt noted that the violations which have arisen from the "the continued occupation of Palestine" have been condemned and examined by the international community.
Both countries, along with Iran, called attention to the new problems relating to the defamation of religion, particularly Islamophobia.
"Today the defamation of Islam and discrimination against Muslims represents the most conspicuous demonstration of contemporary racism and intolerance.
"In this regard the most disturbing phenomenon is the intellectual and ideological validation of Islamophobia," said Khan.
It is regrettable that the media has allowed this kind of defamation, Khan said.
Iran's Ambassador to the UN, S.M.K. Sajjadpour, said the prejudice extended to the "unlawful prohibition of visible signs of religion and culture in the schools" such as a prohibition on the head scarf which Muslim girls and women wear for religious reasons.
Members of all three countries also spoke of racial profiling and the prejudice that has arisen from the fight against terrorism in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attack on the twin towers in New York.
This attack sowed tensions and instability across the world, said Egypt's representative.
"The aftermath of this tragic event saw a new and dangerous phenomenon in incitement to racial and religious hatred. An example in this regard were the highly defamatory cartoons published by a Danish newspaper in 2005 which deeply hurt over a billion Muslims around the world," the Egyptian representative said.
span>
London editor prays for nuclear attack on Israel
The editor of an Arabic daily newspaper published in London said in an interview on Lebanese television that he would dance in Trafalgar Square if Iranian missiles hit Israel. Talking about Iran's nuclear capability on ANB Lebanese television on June 27, Abd Al-Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper, said, "If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight."
In the interview, Bari Atwan was asked if he thought there is a process of détente [vis-à-vis Iran] and an American-Iranian inclination to reach a deal on Iran's nuclear ambitions.
"If there is a deal, it will be at the expense of the Arabs and if there is a war, it will also be at the expense of the Arabs," he responded. "I'm sad to say that we have no backbone now. If Iran reaches a deal with the Americans, what will be the bottom line? That Iran will have a nuclear program, and even if it does not manufacture nuclear weapons in the next 5-10 years, it will do so later."
"One of the fruits of such a deal would be a significant Iranian role in the region. Iran will remain a regional military power, which will threaten, or rather, will control and have hegemony over the region.
"If a war breaks out, where will the Iranians retaliate? If Iran is able to retaliate, it will burn the oil wells, block the Strait of Hormuz, attack the American bases in the Gulf and, Allah willing, it will attack Israel, as well," Bari Atwan continued.
Bari Atwan founded the pan-Arab daily in London in 1989, and today the paper has a circulation of around 50,000. He is also a regular commentator on Sky News and BBC News 24.
Sky News refused to comment specifically on his comments.
"It is not our policy to comment on what contributors may or may not say on other channels," said Adrian Wells, head of foreign news at Sky.
A BBC spokesman told The Jerusalem Post that editors make decisions based on the following BBC guidelines.
"We should not automatically assume that academics and journalists from other organizations are impartial and make it clear to our audience when contributors are associated with a particular viewpoint."
"The BBC is required to explore a range of views, so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or underrepresented."
"The BBC will sometimes need to report on or interview people whose views may cause serious offense to many in our audiences. We must be convinced, after appropriate referral, that a clear public interest outweighs the possible offense."
"We [the BBC] must rigorously test contributors expressing contentious views during an interview."
span>
In the interview, Bari Atwan was asked if he thought there is a process of détente [vis-à-vis Iran] and an American-Iranian inclination to reach a deal on Iran's nuclear ambitions.
"If there is a deal, it will be at the expense of the Arabs and if there is a war, it will also be at the expense of the Arabs," he responded. "I'm sad to say that we have no backbone now. If Iran reaches a deal with the Americans, what will be the bottom line? That Iran will have a nuclear program, and even if it does not manufacture nuclear weapons in the next 5-10 years, it will do so later."
"One of the fruits of such a deal would be a significant Iranian role in the region. Iran will remain a regional military power, which will threaten, or rather, will control and have hegemony over the region.
"If a war breaks out, where will the Iranians retaliate? If Iran is able to retaliate, it will burn the oil wells, block the Strait of Hormuz, attack the American bases in the Gulf and, Allah willing, it will attack Israel, as well," Bari Atwan continued.
Bari Atwan founded the pan-Arab daily in London in 1989, and today the paper has a circulation of around 50,000. He is also a regular commentator on Sky News and BBC News 24.
Sky News refused to comment specifically on his comments.
"It is not our policy to comment on what contributors may or may not say on other channels," said Adrian Wells, head of foreign news at Sky.
A BBC spokesman told The Jerusalem Post that editors make decisions based on the following BBC guidelines.
"We should not automatically assume that academics and journalists from other organizations are impartial and make it clear to our audience when contributors are associated with a particular viewpoint."
"The BBC is required to explore a range of views, so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or underrepresented."
"The BBC will sometimes need to report on or interview people whose views may cause serious offense to many in our audiences. We must be convinced, after appropriate referral, that a clear public interest outweighs the possible offense."
"We [the BBC] must rigorously test contributors expressing contentious views during an interview."
span>
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
View from America: CNN's false symmetry
Critics of religion like to claim that the source of most of the world's ills can be traced to believers who wage wars in the name of their distorted, fanatic faiths. Indeed, in the past year this thesis has led to a spate of new books advocating atheism and deriding religion.
Needless to say, critics of this trend have pointed out that the vast majority of the deaths incurred by conflicts in history's bloodiest century - the 20th - were caused by fanatical non-believers in traditional faiths in the name of their Communist, Maoist and Nazi faiths.
But it must be admitted that violent religious extremists are, at this moment in time, the primary threat to the peace of the world. The only problem with this unpleasant fact is that the opprobrium rightly aimed at the perpetrators of this faith-based violence cannot be neatly distributed across the board to practitioners of the three major monotheistic religions.
Though present-day Jews and Christians are not all saints, there is no getting around the fact that neither of those religions has sprouted a contemporary movement aimed at world domination to be achieved by terror and war. That honor is reserved for the Muslim faith, among whose adherents Islamist terror movements have found a home in the mainstream of its culture.
NOT ALL Muslims are Islamists. Most American Muslims are nothing of the kind. But the notion that supporters of al-Qaida, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other assorted anti-Western and anti-Jewish terror movements are a tiny minority in the Arab and Muslim world is a delusion.
However, in this age of political correctness to single out one group for the sins of a large number of its members is considered unfair and perhaps even racist. So, instead, we are asked to pretend that there is an intrinsic connection, or even symmetry, between Christian, Jewish and Muslim extremists.
That was exactly the premise of a widely heralded three-part series on CNN last week. Titled God's Holy Warriors and fronted by famed international correspondent Christiane Amanpour, it was a tryptich across the globe to highlight the danger from Jewish, Muslim and Christian extremists, who are all given the same treatment and air-time in the guise of even-handedness.
Thus, by its very structure of equating the three different situations, the series was nothing short of a brazen lie.
Though all parts of the series were problematic, the first, devoted to the threat from extremist Jewish settlers and the entire network of support for the State of Israel in the US, was as classic an example of a dishonest piece of biased programming as anything that has been broadcast on a major network.
Though a tiny fraction of the settlement movement, which itself commands the support of only a fraction of Israelis, has committed isolated acts of violence, the notion that this group is in any way analogous to al-Qaida is nothing short of bizarre. If anything, Jewish settlers and ordinary Israelis living inside the pre-1967 borders have themselves been the victims of the intolerance, fanaticism and violence of their Muslim neighbors.
That the broadcasts' view of international law on the question of the legality of the Jewish presence in the territories is one-sided is an understatement. A strong case can be made that the Jews living in those places have every right to do so. Moreover, the idea that their living in these places constitutes the primary obstacle to peace in the Middle East is nothing short of fantastic, especially given the events of the past several years, which have shown how uninterested the Palestinians are in peace with Israel, no matter where its borders are.
Even worse, the show seemingly accepts the discredited canard of Israeli and American Jewish control of American foreign policy put forth by such risible figures as former president Jimmy Carter and academic John Mearsheimer, whose views were treated with respect rather than journalistic skepticism.
As such, the worldwide news network lent itself to a line of argument that has rightly been termed a modern intellectual justification for anti-Semitism.
EXTREMIST MUSLIMS are a genuine threat to both peace and the West; while most settlers are no threat to anyone and are, if anything, among the primary victims of Muslim terror.
As for Evangelical Christians, who were the targets of Amanpour's third program, most American Jews may disagree with most of their political positions but, to date, they have launched no terror attacks, nor do they plan any. Any analogy between them and Islamists is the figment of Amanpour's fevered imagination. If anything, their main sin, in the eyes of many Western apologists for the Islamists, seems to be their support for Jewish victims of Arab terror.
CNN cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of despicable bias. Decent persons of all faiths need to speak out against this network and make sure that it, and its arrogant star Amanpour, are made to hear of our outrage at every possible opportunity and in every way possible, including the use of economic leverage by both sponsors and viewers.
The writer is executive editor of the Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia.
jtobin@jewishexponent.com
span>
Needless to say, critics of this trend have pointed out that the vast majority of the deaths incurred by conflicts in history's bloodiest century - the 20th - were caused by fanatical non-believers in traditional faiths in the name of their Communist, Maoist and Nazi faiths.
But it must be admitted that violent religious extremists are, at this moment in time, the primary threat to the peace of the world. The only problem with this unpleasant fact is that the opprobrium rightly aimed at the perpetrators of this faith-based violence cannot be neatly distributed across the board to practitioners of the three major monotheistic religions.
Though present-day Jews and Christians are not all saints, there is no getting around the fact that neither of those religions has sprouted a contemporary movement aimed at world domination to be achieved by terror and war. That honor is reserved for the Muslim faith, among whose adherents Islamist terror movements have found a home in the mainstream of its culture.
NOT ALL Muslims are Islamists. Most American Muslims are nothing of the kind. But the notion that supporters of al-Qaida, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other assorted anti-Western and anti-Jewish terror movements are a tiny minority in the Arab and Muslim world is a delusion.
However, in this age of political correctness to single out one group for the sins of a large number of its members is considered unfair and perhaps even racist. So, instead, we are asked to pretend that there is an intrinsic connection, or even symmetry, between Christian, Jewish and Muslim extremists.
That was exactly the premise of a widely heralded three-part series on CNN last week. Titled God's Holy Warriors and fronted by famed international correspondent Christiane Amanpour, it was a tryptich across the globe to highlight the danger from Jewish, Muslim and Christian extremists, who are all given the same treatment and air-time in the guise of even-handedness.
Thus, by its very structure of equating the three different situations, the series was nothing short of a brazen lie.
Though all parts of the series were problematic, the first, devoted to the threat from extremist Jewish settlers and the entire network of support for the State of Israel in the US, was as classic an example of a dishonest piece of biased programming as anything that has been broadcast on a major network.
Though a tiny fraction of the settlement movement, which itself commands the support of only a fraction of Israelis, has committed isolated acts of violence, the notion that this group is in any way analogous to al-Qaida is nothing short of bizarre. If anything, Jewish settlers and ordinary Israelis living inside the pre-1967 borders have themselves been the victims of the intolerance, fanaticism and violence of their Muslim neighbors.
That the broadcasts' view of international law on the question of the legality of the Jewish presence in the territories is one-sided is an understatement. A strong case can be made that the Jews living in those places have every right to do so. Moreover, the idea that their living in these places constitutes the primary obstacle to peace in the Middle East is nothing short of fantastic, especially given the events of the past several years, which have shown how uninterested the Palestinians are in peace with Israel, no matter where its borders are.
Even worse, the show seemingly accepts the discredited canard of Israeli and American Jewish control of American foreign policy put forth by such risible figures as former president Jimmy Carter and academic John Mearsheimer, whose views were treated with respect rather than journalistic skepticism.
As such, the worldwide news network lent itself to a line of argument that has rightly been termed a modern intellectual justification for anti-Semitism.
EXTREMIST MUSLIMS are a genuine threat to both peace and the West; while most settlers are no threat to anyone and are, if anything, among the primary victims of Muslim terror.
As for Evangelical Christians, who were the targets of Amanpour's third program, most American Jews may disagree with most of their political positions but, to date, they have launched no terror attacks, nor do they plan any. Any analogy between them and Islamists is the figment of Amanpour's fevered imagination. If anything, their main sin, in the eyes of many Western apologists for the Islamists, seems to be their support for Jewish victims of Arab terror.
CNN cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of despicable bias. Decent persons of all faiths need to speak out against this network and make sure that it, and its arrogant star Amanpour, are made to hear of our outrage at every possible opportunity and in every way possible, including the use of economic leverage by both sponsors and viewers.
The writer is executive editor of the Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia.
jtobin@jewishexponent.com
span>
The Little Explored Offshore Empire of the Muslim Brotherhood
Almost from the inception of the modern Islamic banking structure ( early 1980s), the international Muslim Brotherhood set up a parallel and far-flung offshore structure that has become an integral part of its ability to hide and move money around the world. This network is little understood and has, so far, garnered little attention from the intelligence and law enforcement communities tracking terrorist financial structures.
The fundamental premise of the Brotherhood in setting up this structure was that it is necessary to build a clandestine structure that was hidden from non-Muslims and even Muslims who do not share the Brotherhood's fundamental objective of recreating the Islamic caliphate and spreading Islam, by force and persuasion, across the globe.
To this end, the Brotherhood's strategy, including the construction of its financial network, is built on the pillars of "clandestinity, duplicity, exclusion, violence, pragmatism and opportunism." [1]
Among the leaders of the Brotherhood's financial efforts, based on early Brotherhood documents and public records, are Ibrahim Kamel a founder of Dar al Maal al Islami Bank (DMI ) and its offshore structure in Nassau, Bahamas; Yousef Nada, Ghalib Himmat and Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the Bank al Taqwa structure, in Nassau; and Idriss Nasreddin, with Akida Bank International in Nassau.[2]
Mapping the network of bank, insurance (takofol) companies and offshore corporations – which are often used as covers to open bank accounts and move money in difficult-to-trace paths protected by bank secrecy laws – should be the focus of far more attention because the network provides a mechanism for funding the Brotherhood's licit and illicit activities around the globe .
This is of fundamental importance because the Brotherhood has played a central role in "providing both the ideological and technical capacities for supporting terrorist finance on a global basis… the Brotherhood has spread both the ideology of militant pan-Islamicism and became the spine upon which the funding operations for militant pan-Islamicism was built, taking funds largely generated from wealthy Gulf state elites and distributing them for terrorist education, recruitment and operations widely dispersed throughout the world, especially in areas where Muslims hoped to displace non-Muslim or secular governments."[3]
Almost every major Islamist group can trace its roots to the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928 by the Hassan al-Banna , a pan-Islamicist who opposed the secular tendencies in Islamic nations. Hamas is a direct offshoot of the Brotherhood. Hassan al-Turabi, who offered sanctuary in Sudan to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda allies, is a leader of the Brotherhood. He also sat on the boards of several of the most important Islamic financial institutions, such as DMI. [4]
Bin Laden's mentor Abdullah Azzam was a stalwart of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's chief strategis t, was arrested at age 15 in Egypt for belonging to the Brotherhood. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Ayman al-Zawahiri, "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman, and chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, were members of the Brotherhood.
There has been some understanding of the Brotherhood's relationship to Islamist groups, and of those ties even in the United States. In 2003 Richard Clarke said "the issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – all these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood." [5] However, this understanding has not taken root in the intelligence, law enforcement and policy communities, nor has the financial network of the Brotherhood come under intense scrutiny.
Public records show the Brotherhood's financial network of holding companies, subsidiaries, shell banks and real financial institutions stretches to Panama, Liberia, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Cyprus, Nigeria, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and beyond. Many of the entities are in the names of individuals who, like Nada, Nasreddin, al-Qaradawi and Himmat, have publicly identified themselves as Brotherhood leaders.
A senior U.S. government official estimates the total assets of the international Brotherhood to be between $5 billion and $10 billion.[6] It is a difficult thing to assess because some individual members, such as Nada and Nasreddin, have great individual wealth. They also jointly own dozens of enterprises , both real and offshore, with Ghalib Himmat and other Brotherhood leaders. Discerning what is personal wealth, legitimate business operations, and Brotherhood wealth is difficult if not impossible . It is clear not all the money is intended to finance terror or even radical Islam. But it is equally clear that this network provides the ways and means to move significant sums of cash for those operations.
One indication of a company or corporation being a Brotherhood activity, rather than part of individual assets and wealth, is the overlap of the same people on the directorships of the financial institutions and companies. For example, the Brotherhood network entities established in Nassau, Bahamas, all registered their address as that of the law firm --Arthur Hanna and Sons -- which incorporated their businesses and banking institutions.[7] Members of the Hanna family served on the boards of the banks and companies, handled legal correspondence and represented the companies in legal cases . Many of the directors of the myriad companies served as directors of several companies simultaneously. In turn, many of those same people served simultaneously on the governing boards or sharia boards of DMI and other important Brotherhood-dominated financial institutions. The overlap of directorships and shareholders strongly indicates the tight-knit nature of the organization and the inter-connectedness of the financial network.
The most visible part of the network, offshore shell banks in the Bahamas, did merit some investigation immediately after 9/11. The Treasury Department publicly stated that Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank International were "involved in financing radical groups such as the Palestinian Hamas, Algeria's Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group , Tunisia's An-Nahda, and Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization."[8]
The primary shareholders in al Taqwa Bank were Nada, Nasreddin, members of the Binladen family and dozens of other Brotherhood leaders , including Yousef al-Qaradawi, the grand mufti of the United Arab Emirates.[9]
A cluster of charities based in Herndon, Virginia, where many leaders had ties to Nada and his banking activities, is under active investigation by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Two of the leaders of the cluster, called the "Safa Group," incorporated the al Taqwa Bank in Nassau, and other leaders worked for Nada's banks and had extensive financial dealing with him. Many of the Safa Group's leaders are also members of the Brotherhood.[10]
Unfortunately, while the Treasury Department designated Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank with great fanfare in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it was largely theater. The government of the Bahamas had already shut both banks down in April 2001.[11] The investigations subsequent to 9/11 revealed the terrorist ties that had been suspected, but never acted on . Earlier intelligence operations by the CIA found Bank al-Taqwa and other structures of the business empire were used not only to funnel money to al Qaeda, but also provided the terrorist organization with access to Internet services and encrypted telephones, and helped arrange arms shipments. [12] The Treasury Department, citing intelligence sources, said that "As of October 2000, Bank Al Taqwa appeared to be providing a clandestine line of credit to a close associate of Usama bin Laden and as of late September 2001, Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization received financial assistance from Youssef M. Nada."[13]
The structure of Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank in Nassau follow the pattern of other offshore endeavors. The bank was a virtual bank, with only a handful of employees in Nassau manning computers and telephones. The bank was affiliated with the al Taqwa Management Organization, owned by another Nada entity in Switzerland. Nada owned a controlling interest in the bank, and Nasreddin was a director. At the same address, Nasreddin's Akida Bank Private Ltd, operated as a subsidiary of the Nasreddin Foundation . Nasreddin was the president, and Nada served on the board. The real banking activity, however, was carried out through correspondent relationships with European banks.[14]
Nada and Nasreddin, along with their banks, were designated by the U.S. and the U.N. as terrorist financiers in November 2001 . In August 2002, the United States and Italy jointly designated 14 more joint Nada/Nasreddin entities for supporting terrorism.[15] But that was not the end of the use of shell companies and off-shore havens by the Nada/Nasreddin group. An examination of these activities point to serious shortfalls in the efforts to combat terrorist financing.
Despite the clear and compelling evidence that the offshore network of the Brotherhood provided vital financial and logistical support to a variety of Islamic terrorist operations, the only action taken so far has been to freeze a few more of the companies owned by Nada and Nasreddin. There has been little or no coordinated, concerted effort to map out, identify and understand the rest of the Brotherhood structure. One possible exception is the NATO project on the Muslim Brotherhood, which focused on the Brotherhood's activities in Europe and has sought to identify the different Brotherhood entities.
Many Brotherhood businesses were registered as offshore companies through local trusts in Liechtenstein, where there is no requirement to identify companies' owners, and no record is kept regarding activities or transactions. On Jan. 28, 2002, Nada, in violation of the U.N. travel ban he is subject to, traveled from his home in Campione d'Italia, Switzerland, to Vaduz, Liechtenstein. While in Vaduz, he sought to change the names of several of the designated companies. At the same time, he applied to put the new companies in liquidation, and had himself appointed as liquidator. As offshore entities, the newly-named companies maintained no records in Liechtenstein. [16]
Attempts by designated terrorist financiers to switch company registrations, or establish new companies without their visible participation, is a pattern discovered by U.N. and European investigators. While some entities have been detected, many others are believed to have transpired without being detected or blocked. The United Nations Monitoring Group, which wrote a series of well-documented reports based on months of investigations around the world by a team of financial experts, uncovered the Nada movements in Liechtenstein. The group concluded that "The Nada and Nasreddin examples reflect continued serious weaknesses regarding the control of business activities and assets other than bank accounts." The group cited the difficulties in identifying beneficial ownerships and shared assets, and the weakness of the travel ban. [17] In fact, the panel found the whereabouts of the vast majority of the 272 individuals named as terrorist financiers by the United Nations, remained unknown.[18]
The modus operandi of Nada and Nasreddin is visible elsewhere. Dozens of companies of designated individuals remain active despite the ostensible international commitment to shutting them down . In some cases, such as Panama, companies under the names of designated individuals remain untouched.[19] This does not include the many dozens of companies and other corporate entities belonging to designated individuals, either outright or through nominee shareholders, registered in the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and elsewhere in the Caribbean. While the Brotherhood registered dozens of companies in the 1980s and 1990s using Brotherhood leaders as identified directors, this changed over time, making it more difficult to trace the ownership of the entities. Beginning in the late 1990s, perhaps in response to the few intelligence probes that were carried out, many offshore companies have been shut down. Many appear to be re-opened under the direction of nominee shareholders, making the direct tie to the Brotherhood more difficult to detect.
However, it is often not necessary to take any precautions at all because the international sanctions regime aimed at designated terrorist financiers is so weak. For example, Nigeria is in flagrant violation of the U.N. sanctions regime by refusing to freeze the functioning businesses of Nasreddin. Nasreddin has done nothing to hide his ownership of the enterprises. The primary company is Nasco Investment & Property Ltd., owned by Amana Holdings and Management Inc., a still-functioning offshore company registered in Panama.[20] The company lists Nasreddin as its president .[21]
These issues – offshore and shell companies, front companies and the inability to account for the vast majority of the designated al Qaeda financiers or their billions – make it difficult to ascertain how much of al Qaeda's financial flow has been impaired in the 4 1/2 years since 9/11. While the 9/11 Commission's Monograph on Terrorist Financing states that al Qaeda's operating budget is now reduced to a few million dollars a year and its financial needs are minimal [22], this assessment is not universally shared. The U.N. Monitoring Group estimated the value of al Qaeda's financial portfolio "at around $30 million," including its "large portfolio of ostensibly legitimate businesses."[23] Whatever the amount in the direct portfolio of al Qaeda may be, it is only a small fraction of the portfolio of the Muslim Brotherhood. If al Qaeda were to run into serious financial difficulty, its coffers could easily be quietly replenished through the Brotherhood's offshore structure with very little danger of being interdicted.
If the flow of money to Islamist terrorist groups is to be cut off, and the funding for the Muslim Brotherhood's announced intention of recreating the Islamic caliphate and the eventual domination of the world by a radical Islam is to be slowed, then the offshore structure must be understood and steps must be taken to shut it down. It will be necessary to undertake the tedious task of digging up corporate and financial records and mapping the complex and secretive relationships among individuals, corporations and financial institutions. A first, and relatively easy step, would be to reinvigorate the U.N. sanctions regime by putting pressure on the most flagrant violators. A second would be to dedicate more U.S. government resources to the mission of identifying and tracking Brotherhood financiers and assets. This would raise the Brotherhood's cost of doing business and force the members to move away from the easiest, most profitable ways of doing business, while also affording democratic governments a clearer picture of their enemies' capabilities.
# #
This article first appeared at the International Assessment and Strategy Center's site .
[1] Alain Chouet, "The Association of Muslim Brothers: Chronicle of a Barbarism Foretold," European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, April 6, 2006.
[2] Corporate records and Muslim Brotherhood writings in possession of the author.
[3] Testimony of Jonathan Winer, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law Enforcement, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, July 31, 2003.
[4] Documents on al Turabi's leadership of DMI in possession of the author.
[5] Testimony of Richard A. Clarke before the Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 22, 2003.
[6] Confidential author interview.
[7] Documents in possession of the author.
[8] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[9] 1999 List of Bank al Taqwa shareholders, obtained by author.
[10] Douglas Farah, Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror, Broadway Book, New York, 2004, pp. 155, 209.
[11] Notice of closures in possession of the author.
[12] Hosenball, Perain and Skipp, op cit.
[13] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[14] Corporate records obtained by author and "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[15] "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[16] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1363 (2001) and to Resolution 1455 (2003) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, Dec. 3, 2003, paragraphs 77-80.
[17] Ibid, paragraphs 81-82.
[18] Ibid, executive summary, pg. 3.
[19] Documentation of currently registered companies by SDIs in possession of the author.
[20] Lisa Myers, "Alleged Terrorist Financier Operates in Plain Sight," NBC, June 30, 2005.
[21] Registro Publico de Panama, ficha 271559, rollo 38428.
[22] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Monograph on Terrorist Financing, p. 28.
[23] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1390 (2002) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, December 2002, paragraph 48.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Douglas Farah is an award-winning investigative journalist, author of "Blood From Stones:The Secret Financial Network of Terror", and Senior Fellow in Financial Investigations and Transparency at the International Assessment and Strategy Center . He blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog and also at www.douglasfarah.com.
Author: By Douglas Farah
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 25, 2007 http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1274090
span>
The fundamental premise of the Brotherhood in setting up this structure was that it is necessary to build a clandestine structure that was hidden from non-Muslims and even Muslims who do not share the Brotherhood's fundamental objective of recreating the Islamic caliphate and spreading Islam, by force and persuasion, across the globe.
To this end, the Brotherhood's strategy, including the construction of its financial network, is built on the pillars of "clandestinity, duplicity, exclusion, violence, pragmatism and opportunism." [1]
Among the leaders of the Brotherhood's financial efforts, based on early Brotherhood documents and public records, are Ibrahim Kamel a founder of Dar al Maal al Islami Bank (DMI ) and its offshore structure in Nassau, Bahamas; Yousef Nada, Ghalib Himmat and Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the Bank al Taqwa structure, in Nassau; and Idriss Nasreddin, with Akida Bank International in Nassau.[2]
Mapping the network of bank, insurance (takofol) companies and offshore corporations – which are often used as covers to open bank accounts and move money in difficult-to-trace paths protected by bank secrecy laws – should be the focus of far more attention because the network provides a mechanism for funding the Brotherhood's licit and illicit activities around the globe .
This is of fundamental importance because the Brotherhood has played a central role in "providing both the ideological and technical capacities for supporting terrorist finance on a global basis… the Brotherhood has spread both the ideology of militant pan-Islamicism and became the spine upon which the funding operations for militant pan-Islamicism was built, taking funds largely generated from wealthy Gulf state elites and distributing them for terrorist education, recruitment and operations widely dispersed throughout the world, especially in areas where Muslims hoped to displace non-Muslim or secular governments."[3]
Almost every major Islamist group can trace its roots to the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928 by the Hassan al-Banna , a pan-Islamicist who opposed the secular tendencies in Islamic nations. Hamas is a direct offshoot of the Brotherhood. Hassan al-Turabi, who offered sanctuary in Sudan to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda allies, is a leader of the Brotherhood. He also sat on the boards of several of the most important Islamic financial institutions, such as DMI. [4]
Bin Laden's mentor Abdullah Azzam was a stalwart of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's chief strategis t, was arrested at age 15 in Egypt for belonging to the Brotherhood. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Ayman al-Zawahiri, "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman, and chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, were members of the Brotherhood.
There has been some understanding of the Brotherhood's relationship to Islamist groups, and of those ties even in the United States. In 2003 Richard Clarke said "the issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – all these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood." [5] However, this understanding has not taken root in the intelligence, law enforcement and policy communities, nor has the financial network of the Brotherhood come under intense scrutiny.
Public records show the Brotherhood's financial network of holding companies, subsidiaries, shell banks and real financial institutions stretches to Panama, Liberia, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Cyprus, Nigeria, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and beyond. Many of the entities are in the names of individuals who, like Nada, Nasreddin, al-Qaradawi and Himmat, have publicly identified themselves as Brotherhood leaders.
A senior U.S. government official estimates the total assets of the international Brotherhood to be between $5 billion and $10 billion.[6] It is a difficult thing to assess because some individual members, such as Nada and Nasreddin, have great individual wealth. They also jointly own dozens of enterprises , both real and offshore, with Ghalib Himmat and other Brotherhood leaders. Discerning what is personal wealth, legitimate business operations, and Brotherhood wealth is difficult if not impossible . It is clear not all the money is intended to finance terror or even radical Islam. But it is equally clear that this network provides the ways and means to move significant sums of cash for those operations.
One indication of a company or corporation being a Brotherhood activity, rather than part of individual assets and wealth, is the overlap of the same people on the directorships of the financial institutions and companies. For example, the Brotherhood network entities established in Nassau, Bahamas, all registered their address as that of the law firm --Arthur Hanna and Sons -- which incorporated their businesses and banking institutions.[7] Members of the Hanna family served on the boards of the banks and companies, handled legal correspondence and represented the companies in legal cases . Many of the directors of the myriad companies served as directors of several companies simultaneously. In turn, many of those same people served simultaneously on the governing boards or sharia boards of DMI and other important Brotherhood-dominated financial institutions. The overlap of directorships and shareholders strongly indicates the tight-knit nature of the organization and the inter-connectedness of the financial network.
The most visible part of the network, offshore shell banks in the Bahamas, did merit some investigation immediately after 9/11. The Treasury Department publicly stated that Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank International were "involved in financing radical groups such as the Palestinian Hamas, Algeria's Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group , Tunisia's An-Nahda, and Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization."[8]
The primary shareholders in al Taqwa Bank were Nada, Nasreddin, members of the Binladen family and dozens of other Brotherhood leaders , including Yousef al-Qaradawi, the grand mufti of the United Arab Emirates.[9]
A cluster of charities based in Herndon, Virginia, where many leaders had ties to Nada and his banking activities, is under active investigation by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Two of the leaders of the cluster, called the "Safa Group," incorporated the al Taqwa Bank in Nassau, and other leaders worked for Nada's banks and had extensive financial dealing with him. Many of the Safa Group's leaders are also members of the Brotherhood.[10]
Unfortunately, while the Treasury Department designated Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank with great fanfare in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it was largely theater. The government of the Bahamas had already shut both banks down in April 2001.[11] The investigations subsequent to 9/11 revealed the terrorist ties that had been suspected, but never acted on . Earlier intelligence operations by the CIA found Bank al-Taqwa and other structures of the business empire were used not only to funnel money to al Qaeda, but also provided the terrorist organization with access to Internet services and encrypted telephones, and helped arrange arms shipments. [12] The Treasury Department, citing intelligence sources, said that "As of October 2000, Bank Al Taqwa appeared to be providing a clandestine line of credit to a close associate of Usama bin Laden and as of late September 2001, Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization received financial assistance from Youssef M. Nada."[13]
The structure of Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank in Nassau follow the pattern of other offshore endeavors. The bank was a virtual bank, with only a handful of employees in Nassau manning computers and telephones. The bank was affiliated with the al Taqwa Management Organization, owned by another Nada entity in Switzerland. Nada owned a controlling interest in the bank, and Nasreddin was a director. At the same address, Nasreddin's Akida Bank Private Ltd, operated as a subsidiary of the Nasreddin Foundation . Nasreddin was the president, and Nada served on the board. The real banking activity, however, was carried out through correspondent relationships with European banks.[14]
Nada and Nasreddin, along with their banks, were designated by the U.S. and the U.N. as terrorist financiers in November 2001 . In August 2002, the United States and Italy jointly designated 14 more joint Nada/Nasreddin entities for supporting terrorism.[15] But that was not the end of the use of shell companies and off-shore havens by the Nada/Nasreddin group. An examination of these activities point to serious shortfalls in the efforts to combat terrorist financing.
Despite the clear and compelling evidence that the offshore network of the Brotherhood provided vital financial and logistical support to a variety of Islamic terrorist operations, the only action taken so far has been to freeze a few more of the companies owned by Nada and Nasreddin. There has been little or no coordinated, concerted effort to map out, identify and understand the rest of the Brotherhood structure. One possible exception is the NATO project on the Muslim Brotherhood, which focused on the Brotherhood's activities in Europe and has sought to identify the different Brotherhood entities.
Many Brotherhood businesses were registered as offshore companies through local trusts in Liechtenstein, where there is no requirement to identify companies' owners, and no record is kept regarding activities or transactions. On Jan. 28, 2002, Nada, in violation of the U.N. travel ban he is subject to, traveled from his home in Campione d'Italia, Switzerland, to Vaduz, Liechtenstein. While in Vaduz, he sought to change the names of several of the designated companies. At the same time, he applied to put the new companies in liquidation, and had himself appointed as liquidator. As offshore entities, the newly-named companies maintained no records in Liechtenstein. [16]
Attempts by designated terrorist financiers to switch company registrations, or establish new companies without their visible participation, is a pattern discovered by U.N. and European investigators. While some entities have been detected, many others are believed to have transpired without being detected or blocked. The United Nations Monitoring Group, which wrote a series of well-documented reports based on months of investigations around the world by a team of financial experts, uncovered the Nada movements in Liechtenstein. The group concluded that "The Nada and Nasreddin examples reflect continued serious weaknesses regarding the control of business activities and assets other than bank accounts." The group cited the difficulties in identifying beneficial ownerships and shared assets, and the weakness of the travel ban. [17] In fact, the panel found the whereabouts of the vast majority of the 272 individuals named as terrorist financiers by the United Nations, remained unknown.[18]
The modus operandi of Nada and Nasreddin is visible elsewhere. Dozens of companies of designated individuals remain active despite the ostensible international commitment to shutting them down . In some cases, such as Panama, companies under the names of designated individuals remain untouched.[19] This does not include the many dozens of companies and other corporate entities belonging to designated individuals, either outright or through nominee shareholders, registered in the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and elsewhere in the Caribbean. While the Brotherhood registered dozens of companies in the 1980s and 1990s using Brotherhood leaders as identified directors, this changed over time, making it more difficult to trace the ownership of the entities. Beginning in the late 1990s, perhaps in response to the few intelligence probes that were carried out, many offshore companies have been shut down. Many appear to be re-opened under the direction of nominee shareholders, making the direct tie to the Brotherhood more difficult to detect.
However, it is often not necessary to take any precautions at all because the international sanctions regime aimed at designated terrorist financiers is so weak. For example, Nigeria is in flagrant violation of the U.N. sanctions regime by refusing to freeze the functioning businesses of Nasreddin. Nasreddin has done nothing to hide his ownership of the enterprises. The primary company is Nasco Investment & Property Ltd., owned by Amana Holdings and Management Inc., a still-functioning offshore company registered in Panama.[20] The company lists Nasreddin as its president .[21]
These issues – offshore and shell companies, front companies and the inability to account for the vast majority of the designated al Qaeda financiers or their billions – make it difficult to ascertain how much of al Qaeda's financial flow has been impaired in the 4 1/2 years since 9/11. While the 9/11 Commission's Monograph on Terrorist Financing states that al Qaeda's operating budget is now reduced to a few million dollars a year and its financial needs are minimal [22], this assessment is not universally shared. The U.N. Monitoring Group estimated the value of al Qaeda's financial portfolio "at around $30 million," including its "large portfolio of ostensibly legitimate businesses."[23] Whatever the amount in the direct portfolio of al Qaeda may be, it is only a small fraction of the portfolio of the Muslim Brotherhood. If al Qaeda were to run into serious financial difficulty, its coffers could easily be quietly replenished through the Brotherhood's offshore structure with very little danger of being interdicted.
If the flow of money to Islamist terrorist groups is to be cut off, and the funding for the Muslim Brotherhood's announced intention of recreating the Islamic caliphate and the eventual domination of the world by a radical Islam is to be slowed, then the offshore structure must be understood and steps must be taken to shut it down. It will be necessary to undertake the tedious task of digging up corporate and financial records and mapping the complex and secretive relationships among individuals, corporations and financial institutions. A first, and relatively easy step, would be to reinvigorate the U.N. sanctions regime by putting pressure on the most flagrant violators. A second would be to dedicate more U.S. government resources to the mission of identifying and tracking Brotherhood financiers and assets. This would raise the Brotherhood's cost of doing business and force the members to move away from the easiest, most profitable ways of doing business, while also affording democratic governments a clearer picture of their enemies' capabilities.
# #
This article first appeared at the International Assessment and Strategy Center's site .
[1] Alain Chouet, "The Association of Muslim Brothers: Chronicle of a Barbarism Foretold," European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, April 6, 2006.
[2] Corporate records and Muslim Brotherhood writings in possession of the author.
[3] Testimony of Jonathan Winer, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law Enforcement, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, July 31, 2003.
[4] Documents on al Turabi's leadership of DMI in possession of the author.
[5] Testimony of Richard A. Clarke before the Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 22, 2003.
[6] Confidential author interview.
[7] Documents in possession of the author.
[8] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[9] 1999 List of Bank al Taqwa shareholders, obtained by author.
[10] Douglas Farah, Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror, Broadway Book, New York, 2004, pp. 155, 209.
[11] Notice of closures in possession of the author.
[12] Hosenball, Perain and Skipp, op cit.
[13] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[14] Corporate records obtained by author and "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[15] "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[16] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1363 (2001) and to Resolution 1455 (2003) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, Dec. 3, 2003, paragraphs 77-80.
[17] Ibid, paragraphs 81-82.
[18] Ibid, executive summary, pg. 3.
[19] Documentation of currently registered companies by SDIs in possession of the author.
[20] Lisa Myers, "Alleged Terrorist Financier Operates in Plain Sight," NBC, June 30, 2005.
[21] Registro Publico de Panama, ficha 271559, rollo 38428.
[22] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Monograph on Terrorist Financing, p. 28.
[23] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1390 (2002) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, December 2002, paragraph 48.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Douglas Farah is an award-winning investigative journalist, author of "Blood From Stones:The Secret Financial Network of Terror", and Senior Fellow in Financial Investigations and Transparency at the International Assessment and Strategy Center . He blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog and also at www.douglasfarah.com.
Author: By Douglas Farah
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 25, 2007 http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1274090
span>
The Little Explored Offshore Empire of the Muslim Brotherhood
Almost from the inception of the modern Islamic banking structure ( early 1980s), the international Muslim Brotherhood set up a parallel and far-flung offshore structure that has become an integral part of its ability to hide and move money around the world. This network is little understood and has, so far, garnered little attention from the intelligence and law enforcement communities tracking terrorist financial structures.
The fundamental premise of the Brotherhood in setting up this structure was that it is necessary to build a clandestine structure that was hidden from non-Muslims and even Muslims who do not share the Brotherhood's fundamental objective of recreating the Islamic caliphate and spreading Islam, by force and persuasion, across the globe.
To this end, the Brotherhood's strategy, including the construction of its financial network, is built on the pillars of "clandestinity, duplicity, exclusion, violence, pragmatism and opportunism." [1]
Among the leaders of the Brotherhood's financial efforts, based on early Brotherhood documents and public records, are Ibrahim Kamel a founder of Dar al Maal al Islami Bank (DMI ) and its offshore structure in Nassau, Bahamas; Yousef Nada, Ghalib Himmat and Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the Bank al Taqwa structure, in Nassau; and Idriss Nasreddin, with Akida Bank International in Nassau.[2]
Mapping the network of bank, insurance (takofol) companies and offshore corporations – which are often used as covers to open bank accounts and move money in difficult-to-trace paths protected by bank secrecy laws – should be the focus of far more attention because the network provides a mechanism for funding the Brotherhood's licit and illicit activities around the globe .
This is of fundamental importance because the Brotherhood has played a central role in "providing both the ideological and technical capacities for supporting terrorist finance on a global basis… the Brotherhood has spread both the ideology of militant pan-Islamicism and became the spine upon which the funding operations for militant pan-Islamicism was built, taking funds largely generated from wealthy Gulf state elites and distributing them for terrorist education, recruitment and operations widely dispersed throughout the world, especially in areas where Muslims hoped to displace non-Muslim or secular governments."[3]
Almost every major Islamist group can trace its roots to the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928 by the Hassan al-Banna , a pan-Islamicist who opposed the secular tendencies in Islamic nations. Hamas is a direct offshoot of the Brotherhood. Hassan al-Turabi, who offered sanctuary in Sudan to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda allies, is a leader of the Brotherhood. He also sat on the boards of several of the most important Islamic financial institutions, such as DMI. [4]
Bin Laden's mentor Abdullah Azzam was a stalwart of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's chief strategis t, was arrested at age 15 in Egypt for belonging to the Brotherhood. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Ayman al-Zawahiri, "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman, and chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, were members of the Brotherhood.
There has been some understanding of the Brotherhood's relationship to Islamist groups, and of those ties even in the United States. In 2003 Richard Clarke said "the issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – all these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood." [5] However, this understanding has not taken root in the intelligence, law enforcement and policy communities, nor has the financial network of the Brotherhood come under intense scrutiny.
Public records show the Brotherhood's financial network of holding companies, subsidiaries, shell banks and real financial institutions stretches to Panama, Liberia, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Cyprus, Nigeria, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and beyond. Many of the entities are in the names of individuals who, like Nada, Nasreddin, al-Qaradawi and Himmat, have publicly identified themselves as Brotherhood leaders.
A senior U.S. government official estimates the total assets of the international Brotherhood to be between $5 billion and $10 billion.[6] It is a difficult thing to assess because some individual members, such as Nada and Nasreddin, have great individual wealth. They also jointly own dozens of enterprises , both real and offshore, with Ghalib Himmat and other Brotherhood leaders. Discerning what is personal wealth, legitimate business operations, and Brotherhood wealth is difficult if not impossible . It is clear not all the money is intended to finance terror or even radical Islam. But it is equally clear that this network provides the ways and means to move significant sums of cash for those operations.
One indication of a company or corporation being a Brotherhood activity, rather than part of individual assets and wealth, is the overlap of the same people on the directorships of the financial institutions and companies. For example, the Brotherhood network entities established in Nassau, Bahamas, all registered their address as that of the law firm --Arthur Hanna and Sons -- which incorporated their businesses and banking institutions.[7] Members of the Hanna family served on the boards of the banks and companies, handled legal correspondence and represented the companies in legal cases . Many of the directors of the myriad companies served as directors of several companies simultaneously. In turn, many of those same people served simultaneously on the governing boards or sharia boards of DMI and other important Brotherhood-dominated financial institutions. The overlap of directorships and shareholders strongly indicates the tight-knit nature of the organization and the inter-connectedness of the financial network.
The most visible part of the network, offshore shell banks in the Bahamas, did merit some investigation immediately after 9/11. The Treasury Department publicly stated that Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank International were "involved in financing radical groups such as the Palestinian Hamas, Algeria's Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group , Tunisia's An-Nahda, and Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization."[8]
The primary shareholders in al Taqwa Bank were Nada, Nasreddin, members of the Binladen family and dozens of other Brotherhood leaders , including Yousef al-Qaradawi, the grand mufti of the United Arab Emirates.[9]
A cluster of charities based in Herndon, Virginia, where many leaders had ties to Nada and his banking activities, is under active investigation by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Two of the leaders of the cluster, called the "Safa Group," incorporated the al Taqwa Bank in Nassau, and other leaders worked for Nada's banks and had extensive financial dealing with him. Many of the Safa Group's leaders are also members of the Brotherhood.[10]
Unfortunately, while the Treasury Department designated Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank with great fanfare in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it was largely theater. The government of the Bahamas had already shut both banks down in April 2001.[11] The investigations subsequent to 9/11 revealed the terrorist ties that had been suspected, but never acted on . Earlier intelligence operations by the CIA found Bank al-Taqwa and other structures of the business empire were used not only to funnel money to al Qaeda, but also provided the terrorist organization with access to Internet services and encrypted telephones, and helped arrange arms shipments. [12] The Treasury Department, citing intelligence sources, said that "As of October 2000, Bank Al Taqwa appeared to be providing a clandestine line of credit to a close associate of Usama bin Laden and as of late September 2001, Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization received financial assistance from Youssef M. Nada."[13]
The structure of Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank in Nassau follow the pattern of other offshore endeavors. The bank was a virtual bank, with only a handful of employees in Nassau manning computers and telephones. The bank was affiliated with the al Taqwa Management Organization, owned by another Nada entity in Switzerland. Nada owned a controlling interest in the bank, and Nasreddin was a director. At the same address, Nasreddin's Akida Bank Private Ltd, operated as a subsidiary of the Nasreddin Foundation . Nasreddin was the president, and Nada served on the board. The real banking activity, however, was carried out through correspondent relationships with European banks.[14]
Nada and Nasreddin, along with their banks, were designated by the U.S. and the U.N. as terrorist financiers in November 2001 . In August 2002, the United States and Italy jointly designated 14 more joint Nada/Nasreddin entities for supporting terrorism.[15] But that was not the end of the use of shell companies and off-shore havens by the Nada/Nasreddin group. An examination of these activities point to serious shortfalls in the efforts to combat terrorist financing.
Despite the clear and compelling evidence that the offshore network of the Brotherhood provided vital financial and logistical support to a variety of Islamic terrorist operations, the only action taken so far has been to freeze a few more of the companies owned by Nada and Nasreddin. There has been little or no coordinated, concerted effort to map out, identify and understand the rest of the Brotherhood structure. One possible exception is the NATO project on the Muslim Brotherhood, which focused on the Brotherhood's activities in Europe and has sought to identify the different Brotherhood entities.
Many Brotherhood businesses were registered as offshore companies through local trusts in Liechtenstein, where there is no requirement to identify companies' owners, and no record is kept regarding activities or transactions. On Jan. 28, 2002, Nada, in violation of the U.N. travel ban he is subject to, traveled from his home in Campione d'Italia, Switzerland, to Vaduz, Liechtenstein. While in Vaduz, he sought to change the names of several of the designated companies. At the same time, he applied to put the new companies in liquidation, and had himself appointed as liquidator. As offshore entities, the newly-named companies maintained no records in Liechtenstein. [16]
Attempts by designated terrorist financiers to switch company registrations, or establish new companies without their visible participation, is a pattern discovered by U.N. and European investigators. While some entities have been detected, many others are believed to have transpired without being detected or blocked. The United Nations Monitoring Group, which wrote a series of well-documented reports based on months of investigations around the world by a team of financial experts, uncovered the Nada movements in Liechtenstein. The group concluded that "The Nada and Nasreddin examples reflect continued serious weaknesses regarding the control of business activities and assets other than bank accounts." The group cited the difficulties in identifying beneficial ownerships and shared assets, and the weakness of the travel ban. [17] In fact, the panel found the whereabouts of the vast majority of the 272 individuals named as terrorist financiers by the United Nations, remained unknown.[18]
The modus operandi of Nada and Nasreddin is visible elsewhere. Dozens of companies of designated individuals remain active despite the ostensible international commitment to shutting them down . In some cases, such as Panama, companies under the names of designated individuals remain untouched.[19] This does not include the many dozens of companies and other corporate entities belonging to designated individuals, either outright or through nominee shareholders, registered in the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and elsewhere in the Caribbean. While the Brotherhood registered dozens of companies in the 1980s and 1990s using Brotherhood leaders as identified directors, this changed over time, making it more difficult to trace the ownership of the entities. Beginning in the late 1990s, perhaps in response to the few intelligence probes that were carried out, many offshore companies have been shut down. Many appear to be re-opened under the direction of nominee shareholders, making the direct tie to the Brotherhood more difficult to detect.
However, it is often not necessary to take any precautions at all because the international sanctions regime aimed at designated terrorist financiers is so weak. For example, Nigeria is in flagrant violation of the U.N. sanctions regime by refusing to freeze the functioning businesses of Nasreddin. Nasreddin has done nothing to hide his ownership of the enterprises. The primary company is Nasco Investment & Property Ltd., owned by Amana Holdings and Management Inc., a still-functioning offshore company registered in Panama.[20] The company lists Nasreddin as its president .[21]
These issues – offshore and shell companies, front companies and the inability to account for the vast majority of the designated al Qaeda financiers or their billions – make it difficult to ascertain how much of al Qaeda's financial flow has been impaired in the 4 1/2 years since 9/11. While the 9/11 Commission's Monograph on Terrorist Financing states that al Qaeda's operating budget is now reduced to a few million dollars a year and its financial needs are minimal [22], this assessment is not universally shared. The U.N. Monitoring Group estimated the value of al Qaeda's financial portfolio "at around $30 million," including its "large portfolio of ostensibly legitimate businesses."[23] Whatever the amount in the direct portfolio of al Qaeda may be, it is only a small fraction of the portfolio of the Muslim Brotherhood. If al Qaeda were to run into serious financial difficulty, its coffers could easily be quietly replenished through the Brotherhood's offshore structure with very little danger of being interdicted.
If the flow of money to Islamist terrorist groups is to be cut off, and the funding for the Muslim Brotherhood's announced intention of recreating the Islamic caliphate and the eventual domination of the world by a radical Islam is to be slowed, then the offshore structure must be understood and steps must be taken to shut it down. It will be necessary to undertake the tedious task of digging up corporate and financial records and mapping the complex and secretive relationships among individuals, corporations and financial institutions. A first, and relatively easy step, would be to reinvigorate the U.N. sanctions regime by putting pressure on the most flagrant violators. A second would be to dedicate more U.S. government resources to the mission of identifying and tracking Brotherhood financiers and assets. This would raise the Brotherhood's cost of doing business and force the members to move away from the easiest, most profitable ways of doing business, while also affording democratic governments a clearer picture of their enemies' capabilities.
# #
This article first appeared at the International Assessment and Strategy Center's site .
[1] Alain Chouet, "The Association of Muslim Brothers: Chronicle of a Barbarism Foretold," European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, April 6, 2006.
[2] Corporate records and Muslim Brotherhood writings in possession of the author.
[3] Testimony of Jonathan Winer, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law Enforcement, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, July 31, 2003.
[4] Documents on al Turabi's leadership of DMI in possession of the author.
[5] Testimony of Richard A. Clarke before the Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 22, 2003.
[6] Confidential author interview.
[7] Documents in possession of the author.
[8] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[9] 1999 List of Bank al Taqwa shareholders, obtained by author.
[10] Douglas Farah, Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror, Broadway Book, New York, 2004, pp. 155, 209.
[11] Notice of closures in possession of the author.
[12] Hosenball, Perain and Skipp, op cit.
[13] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[14] Corporate records obtained by author and "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[15] "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[16] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1363 (2001) and to Resolution 1455 (2003) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, Dec. 3, 2003, paragraphs 77-80.
[17] Ibid, paragraphs 81-82.
[18] Ibid, executive summary, pg. 3.
[19] Documentation of currently registered companies by SDIs in possession of the author.
[20] Lisa Myers, "Alleged Terrorist Financier Operates in Plain Sight," NBC, June 30, 2005.
[21] Registro Publico de Panama, ficha 271559, rollo 38428.
[22] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Monograph on Terrorist Financing, p. 28.
[23] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1390 (2002) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, December 2002, paragraph 48.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Douglas Farah is an award-winning investigative journalist, author of "Blood From Stones:The Secret Financial Network of Terror", and Senior Fellow in Financial Investigations and Transparency at the International Assessment and Strategy Center . He blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog and also at www.douglasfarah.com.
Author: By Douglas Farah
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 25, 2007 http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1274090
span>
The fundamental premise of the Brotherhood in setting up this structure was that it is necessary to build a clandestine structure that was hidden from non-Muslims and even Muslims who do not share the Brotherhood's fundamental objective of recreating the Islamic caliphate and spreading Islam, by force and persuasion, across the globe.
To this end, the Brotherhood's strategy, including the construction of its financial network, is built on the pillars of "clandestinity, duplicity, exclusion, violence, pragmatism and opportunism." [1]
Among the leaders of the Brotherhood's financial efforts, based on early Brotherhood documents and public records, are Ibrahim Kamel a founder of Dar al Maal al Islami Bank (DMI ) and its offshore structure in Nassau, Bahamas; Yousef Nada, Ghalib Himmat and Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the Bank al Taqwa structure, in Nassau; and Idriss Nasreddin, with Akida Bank International in Nassau.[2]
Mapping the network of bank, insurance (takofol) companies and offshore corporations – which are often used as covers to open bank accounts and move money in difficult-to-trace paths protected by bank secrecy laws – should be the focus of far more attention because the network provides a mechanism for funding the Brotherhood's licit and illicit activities around the globe .
This is of fundamental importance because the Brotherhood has played a central role in "providing both the ideological and technical capacities for supporting terrorist finance on a global basis… the Brotherhood has spread both the ideology of militant pan-Islamicism and became the spine upon which the funding operations for militant pan-Islamicism was built, taking funds largely generated from wealthy Gulf state elites and distributing them for terrorist education, recruitment and operations widely dispersed throughout the world, especially in areas where Muslims hoped to displace non-Muslim or secular governments."[3]
Almost every major Islamist group can trace its roots to the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928 by the Hassan al-Banna , a pan-Islamicist who opposed the secular tendencies in Islamic nations. Hamas is a direct offshoot of the Brotherhood. Hassan al-Turabi, who offered sanctuary in Sudan to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda allies, is a leader of the Brotherhood. He also sat on the boards of several of the most important Islamic financial institutions, such as DMI. [4]
Bin Laden's mentor Abdullah Azzam was a stalwart of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's chief strategis t, was arrested at age 15 in Egypt for belonging to the Brotherhood. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Ayman al-Zawahiri, "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman, and chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, were members of the Brotherhood.
There has been some understanding of the Brotherhood's relationship to Islamist groups, and of those ties even in the United States. In 2003 Richard Clarke said "the issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – all these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood." [5] However, this understanding has not taken root in the intelligence, law enforcement and policy communities, nor has the financial network of the Brotherhood come under intense scrutiny.
Public records show the Brotherhood's financial network of holding companies, subsidiaries, shell banks and real financial institutions stretches to Panama, Liberia, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Cyprus, Nigeria, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and beyond. Many of the entities are in the names of individuals who, like Nada, Nasreddin, al-Qaradawi and Himmat, have publicly identified themselves as Brotherhood leaders.
A senior U.S. government official estimates the total assets of the international Brotherhood to be between $5 billion and $10 billion.[6] It is a difficult thing to assess because some individual members, such as Nada and Nasreddin, have great individual wealth. They also jointly own dozens of enterprises , both real and offshore, with Ghalib Himmat and other Brotherhood leaders. Discerning what is personal wealth, legitimate business operations, and Brotherhood wealth is difficult if not impossible . It is clear not all the money is intended to finance terror or even radical Islam. But it is equally clear that this network provides the ways and means to move significant sums of cash for those operations.
One indication of a company or corporation being a Brotherhood activity, rather than part of individual assets and wealth, is the overlap of the same people on the directorships of the financial institutions and companies. For example, the Brotherhood network entities established in Nassau, Bahamas, all registered their address as that of the law firm --Arthur Hanna and Sons -- which incorporated their businesses and banking institutions.[7] Members of the Hanna family served on the boards of the banks and companies, handled legal correspondence and represented the companies in legal cases . Many of the directors of the myriad companies served as directors of several companies simultaneously. In turn, many of those same people served simultaneously on the governing boards or sharia boards of DMI and other important Brotherhood-dominated financial institutions. The overlap of directorships and shareholders strongly indicates the tight-knit nature of the organization and the inter-connectedness of the financial network.
The most visible part of the network, offshore shell banks in the Bahamas, did merit some investigation immediately after 9/11. The Treasury Department publicly stated that Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank International were "involved in financing radical groups such as the Palestinian Hamas, Algeria's Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group , Tunisia's An-Nahda, and Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization."[8]
The primary shareholders in al Taqwa Bank were Nada, Nasreddin, members of the Binladen family and dozens of other Brotherhood leaders , including Yousef al-Qaradawi, the grand mufti of the United Arab Emirates.[9]
A cluster of charities based in Herndon, Virginia, where many leaders had ties to Nada and his banking activities, is under active investigation by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Two of the leaders of the cluster, called the "Safa Group," incorporated the al Taqwa Bank in Nassau, and other leaders worked for Nada's banks and had extensive financial dealing with him. Many of the Safa Group's leaders are also members of the Brotherhood.[10]
Unfortunately, while the Treasury Department designated Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank with great fanfare in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it was largely theater. The government of the Bahamas had already shut both banks down in April 2001.[11] The investigations subsequent to 9/11 revealed the terrorist ties that had been suspected, but never acted on . Earlier intelligence operations by the CIA found Bank al-Taqwa and other structures of the business empire were used not only to funnel money to al Qaeda, but also provided the terrorist organization with access to Internet services and encrypted telephones, and helped arrange arms shipments. [12] The Treasury Department, citing intelligence sources, said that "As of October 2000, Bank Al Taqwa appeared to be providing a clandestine line of credit to a close associate of Usama bin Laden and as of late September 2001, Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization received financial assistance from Youssef M. Nada."[13]
The structure of Bank al Taqwa and Akida Bank in Nassau follow the pattern of other offshore endeavors. The bank was a virtual bank, with only a handful of employees in Nassau manning computers and telephones. The bank was affiliated with the al Taqwa Management Organization, owned by another Nada entity in Switzerland. Nada owned a controlling interest in the bank, and Nasreddin was a director. At the same address, Nasreddin's Akida Bank Private Ltd, operated as a subsidiary of the Nasreddin Foundation . Nasreddin was the president, and Nada served on the board. The real banking activity, however, was carried out through correspondent relationships with European banks.[14]
Nada and Nasreddin, along with their banks, were designated by the U.S. and the U.N. as terrorist financiers in November 2001 . In August 2002, the United States and Italy jointly designated 14 more joint Nada/Nasreddin entities for supporting terrorism.[15] But that was not the end of the use of shell companies and off-shore havens by the Nada/Nasreddin group. An examination of these activities point to serious shortfalls in the efforts to combat terrorist financing.
Despite the clear and compelling evidence that the offshore network of the Brotherhood provided vital financial and logistical support to a variety of Islamic terrorist operations, the only action taken so far has been to freeze a few more of the companies owned by Nada and Nasreddin. There has been little or no coordinated, concerted effort to map out, identify and understand the rest of the Brotherhood structure. One possible exception is the NATO project on the Muslim Brotherhood, which focused on the Brotherhood's activities in Europe and has sought to identify the different Brotherhood entities.
Many Brotherhood businesses were registered as offshore companies through local trusts in Liechtenstein, where there is no requirement to identify companies' owners, and no record is kept regarding activities or transactions. On Jan. 28, 2002, Nada, in violation of the U.N. travel ban he is subject to, traveled from his home in Campione d'Italia, Switzerland, to Vaduz, Liechtenstein. While in Vaduz, he sought to change the names of several of the designated companies. At the same time, he applied to put the new companies in liquidation, and had himself appointed as liquidator. As offshore entities, the newly-named companies maintained no records in Liechtenstein. [16]
Attempts by designated terrorist financiers to switch company registrations, or establish new companies without their visible participation, is a pattern discovered by U.N. and European investigators. While some entities have been detected, many others are believed to have transpired without being detected or blocked. The United Nations Monitoring Group, which wrote a series of well-documented reports based on months of investigations around the world by a team of financial experts, uncovered the Nada movements in Liechtenstein. The group concluded that "The Nada and Nasreddin examples reflect continued serious weaknesses regarding the control of business activities and assets other than bank accounts." The group cited the difficulties in identifying beneficial ownerships and shared assets, and the weakness of the travel ban. [17] In fact, the panel found the whereabouts of the vast majority of the 272 individuals named as terrorist financiers by the United Nations, remained unknown.[18]
The modus operandi of Nada and Nasreddin is visible elsewhere. Dozens of companies of designated individuals remain active despite the ostensible international commitment to shutting them down . In some cases, such as Panama, companies under the names of designated individuals remain untouched.[19] This does not include the many dozens of companies and other corporate entities belonging to designated individuals, either outright or through nominee shareholders, registered in the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and elsewhere in the Caribbean. While the Brotherhood registered dozens of companies in the 1980s and 1990s using Brotherhood leaders as identified directors, this changed over time, making it more difficult to trace the ownership of the entities. Beginning in the late 1990s, perhaps in response to the few intelligence probes that were carried out, many offshore companies have been shut down. Many appear to be re-opened under the direction of nominee shareholders, making the direct tie to the Brotherhood more difficult to detect.
However, it is often not necessary to take any precautions at all because the international sanctions regime aimed at designated terrorist financiers is so weak. For example, Nigeria is in flagrant violation of the U.N. sanctions regime by refusing to freeze the functioning businesses of Nasreddin. Nasreddin has done nothing to hide his ownership of the enterprises. The primary company is Nasco Investment & Property Ltd., owned by Amana Holdings and Management Inc., a still-functioning offshore company registered in Panama.[20] The company lists Nasreddin as its president .[21]
These issues – offshore and shell companies, front companies and the inability to account for the vast majority of the designated al Qaeda financiers or their billions – make it difficult to ascertain how much of al Qaeda's financial flow has been impaired in the 4 1/2 years since 9/11. While the 9/11 Commission's Monograph on Terrorist Financing states that al Qaeda's operating budget is now reduced to a few million dollars a year and its financial needs are minimal [22], this assessment is not universally shared. The U.N. Monitoring Group estimated the value of al Qaeda's financial portfolio "at around $30 million," including its "large portfolio of ostensibly legitimate businesses."[23] Whatever the amount in the direct portfolio of al Qaeda may be, it is only a small fraction of the portfolio of the Muslim Brotherhood. If al Qaeda were to run into serious financial difficulty, its coffers could easily be quietly replenished through the Brotherhood's offshore structure with very little danger of being interdicted.
If the flow of money to Islamist terrorist groups is to be cut off, and the funding for the Muslim Brotherhood's announced intention of recreating the Islamic caliphate and the eventual domination of the world by a radical Islam is to be slowed, then the offshore structure must be understood and steps must be taken to shut it down. It will be necessary to undertake the tedious task of digging up corporate and financial records and mapping the complex and secretive relationships among individuals, corporations and financial institutions. A first, and relatively easy step, would be to reinvigorate the U.N. sanctions regime by putting pressure on the most flagrant violators. A second would be to dedicate more U.S. government resources to the mission of identifying and tracking Brotherhood financiers and assets. This would raise the Brotherhood's cost of doing business and force the members to move away from the easiest, most profitable ways of doing business, while also affording democratic governments a clearer picture of their enemies' capabilities.
# #
This article first appeared at the International Assessment and Strategy Center's site .
[1] Alain Chouet, "The Association of Muslim Brothers: Chronicle of a Barbarism Foretold," European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, April 6, 2006.
[2] Corporate records and Muslim Brotherhood writings in possession of the author.
[3] Testimony of Jonathan Winer, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law Enforcement, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, July 31, 2003.
[4] Documents on al Turabi's leadership of DMI in possession of the author.
[5] Testimony of Richard A. Clarke before the Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 22, 2003.
[6] Confidential author interview.
[7] Documents in possession of the author.
[8] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[9] 1999 List of Bank al Taqwa shareholders, obtained by author.
[10] Douglas Farah, Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror, Broadway Book, New York, 2004, pp. 155, 209.
[11] Notice of closures in possession of the author.
[12] Hosenball, Perain and Skipp, op cit.
[13] The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[14] Corporate records obtained by author and "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[15] "The United States and Italy Designate Twenty-Five New Financiers of Terror," U.S. Treasury Department, Aug. 29, 2002.
[16] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1363 (2001) and to Resolution 1455 (2003) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, Dec. 3, 2003, paragraphs 77-80.
[17] Ibid, paragraphs 81-82.
[18] Ibid, executive summary, pg. 3.
[19] Documentation of currently registered companies by SDIs in possession of the author.
[20] Lisa Myers, "Alleged Terrorist Financier Operates in Plain Sight," NBC, June 30, 2005.
[21] Registro Publico de Panama, ficha 271559, rollo 38428.
[22] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Monograph on Terrorist Financing, p. 28.
[23] Second report of the Monitoring Group Established Pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1390 (2002) on Sanctions Against al Qaeda, December 2002, paragraph 48.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Douglas Farah is an award-winning investigative journalist, author of "Blood From Stones:The Secret Financial Network of Terror", and Senior Fellow in Financial Investigations and Transparency at the International Assessment and Strategy Center . He blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog and also at www.douglasfarah.com.
Author: By Douglas Farah
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 25, 2007 http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1274090
span>
The challenge that is Gaza
The following is from an Arab point of view:
Gaza Strip is proving to be a rare geopolitical anomaly. Home to over 1.4 million Palestinians, the majority of whom are refugees, it is neither an independent country nor is it, at least technically, under occupation. It is not a protectorate of a regional or global power, nor is it a rogue state that threatens world peace.
Gaza is an anachronistic entity, lost in time and space, a desert strip that is part of historical Palestine, but is so distanced from the urban centres of the West Bank, with which it has no contiguous borders, that, theoretically speaking, the future Palestinian state can be created without it.
It is separated from it by hundreds of square miles of Israeli territory and although it borders Egypt, Cairo is a continent away.
Since June Gaza's peculiar situation took another twist to the bizarre. Hamas, the Islamist movement, which was founded in the Strip's refugee camps in the 1980s, overwhelmed the Fatah-led Palestinian National Authority forces and drove them out.
Instead of the Palestinian flag that hovered over official buildings since the jubilant return of Yasser Arafat to the strip in 1994, now flew the unmistakable green banner of Hamas.
Since a new government was sworn in Ramallah about two months ago, the 360 square mile strip became an even more isolated outpost.
Cut off by Israel from the rest of the world, Gaza became, yet again, a mass concentration camp tucked away between the desert and the sea.
The PNA, wounded and humiliated by the outcome of June's "battle for Gaza", looked on as approximately one third of its subjects suffered a humanitarian crisis of dire proportions. In the absence of political dialogue between Hamas and President Mahmoud Abbas, Gaza was left out to rot.
The latest affront to its stranded population was the decision by the EU to suspend the flow of money to pay for fuel that is needed to run the Strip's electricity generators.
For two nights Gaza was engulfed in darkness while aid agencies warned of catastrophic consequences as Gaza's water pumps, sewage treatment plants and essential services came to a halt.
Hospitals switched to emergency generators but as fuel supplies dried up health workers prepared for impending disaster.
Since then the EU has agreed to resume funding, but the incident underlined the humanitarian aspects of the Gaza stalemate.
Gazans are punished indiscriminately because Hamas is being chastised by the international community for carrying out its June putsch. To add to the Strip's woes, Israel has resumed its assassination programme of alleged jihadists with innocent bystanders, including children, blown away in the process.
The same international community has failed to take action, as it has repeatedly done so in the past, to quell Israeli attacks.
The Gaza impasse serves Israeli objectives of punishing Hamas and putting pressure on the Salam Fayyad government in Ramallah to prevent possible political reconciliation with the Gaza leadership.
Since the rift took place, Mahmoud Abbas has received new backing from key players, especially the US, EU and Israel. Money is flowing back into the West Bank and, for the time-being, Palestinians in these territories are spared further deterioration in their living conditions.
The new government, which replaced the coalition that governed under Esmail Haniya, is yet to deliver on other promises including the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners and detainees.
The future of the peace process is still in doubt as parties are said to explore options in preparation for the US-sponsored peace conference to be held in the coming two months.
There is still doubt over Abbas's decision to hold early presidential and legislative elections in an effort to undermine Hamas's control of the latter. How will the elections, which Hamas opposes, be held in Gaza remains an open issue.
Abbas still enjoys access to most Arab leaders even though it is said that relations with the Saudis have cooled considerably after the Gaza events which shattered the Makkah accord.
The Arab League, which had decided to investigate the Gaza coup, seems to have succumbed to pressure not to go any further with its fact-finding efforts.
Nothing is normal when it comes to the Palestinian issue. Gaza is isolated and subdued but it is far from the control of the PNA.
The humanitarian portion of the standoff will continue to challenge Abbas and his government as well as the international community.
Meanwhile, the political aspect is getting more complicated with no breakthrough in sight. The question on everyone's lips is simple and complicated: What to do about Gaza?
So far the choice of talking to Hamas, by the US, EU and even the PNA, has not been taken seriously. There seems to be a feeling that if Gazans are left to suffer for a while they will eventually turn against the Islamist movement. That is a far-fetched scenario.
When the EU suspended funding for oil shipments, public sentiment in Gaza turned against the Fayyad government and the international community.
Hamas cried foul, accusing the Europeans of adopting Israel's decades-old policy of collective punishment. The same happened when Israel refused to allow thousands of stranded Palestinians in Sinai from crossing into Gaza for weeks. Many died at the shuttered border crossing.
The realities in Gaza are stark and disturbing. It is shameful that Arab political paralysis has again failed the Palestinian people. When Gaza's electric generators went silent the Arab world looked on as millions spent their night without power.
Throughout the course of the Palestinian tragedy, Gaza presented a special case for Israel, as it does now, and for the PLO. It was in Gaza that the first Intifada was ignited in 1988.
Hamas may be viewed as the problem today in Gaza, but the Strip has always been a troubled zone. The geopolitical anomaly that is the Gaza Strip will continue to challenge our conscience, as well as our political will, as it has done over the past months and years. Isolating it and looking the other way as its problems compound is not the solution.
* Published in UAE's GULF NEWS on August 26, 2007. Osama Al Sharif is a Jordanian journalist based in Amman.
span>
Gaza Strip is proving to be a rare geopolitical anomaly. Home to over 1.4 million Palestinians, the majority of whom are refugees, it is neither an independent country nor is it, at least technically, under occupation. It is not a protectorate of a regional or global power, nor is it a rogue state that threatens world peace.
Gaza is an anachronistic entity, lost in time and space, a desert strip that is part of historical Palestine, but is so distanced from the urban centres of the West Bank, with which it has no contiguous borders, that, theoretically speaking, the future Palestinian state can be created without it.
It is separated from it by hundreds of square miles of Israeli territory and although it borders Egypt, Cairo is a continent away.
Since June Gaza's peculiar situation took another twist to the bizarre. Hamas, the Islamist movement, which was founded in the Strip's refugee camps in the 1980s, overwhelmed the Fatah-led Palestinian National Authority forces and drove them out.
Instead of the Palestinian flag that hovered over official buildings since the jubilant return of Yasser Arafat to the strip in 1994, now flew the unmistakable green banner of Hamas.
Since a new government was sworn in Ramallah about two months ago, the 360 square mile strip became an even more isolated outpost.
Cut off by Israel from the rest of the world, Gaza became, yet again, a mass concentration camp tucked away between the desert and the sea.
The PNA, wounded and humiliated by the outcome of June's "battle for Gaza", looked on as approximately one third of its subjects suffered a humanitarian crisis of dire proportions. In the absence of political dialogue between Hamas and President Mahmoud Abbas, Gaza was left out to rot.
The latest affront to its stranded population was the decision by the EU to suspend the flow of money to pay for fuel that is needed to run the Strip's electricity generators.
For two nights Gaza was engulfed in darkness while aid agencies warned of catastrophic consequences as Gaza's water pumps, sewage treatment plants and essential services came to a halt.
Hospitals switched to emergency generators but as fuel supplies dried up health workers prepared for impending disaster.
Since then the EU has agreed to resume funding, but the incident underlined the humanitarian aspects of the Gaza stalemate.
Gazans are punished indiscriminately because Hamas is being chastised by the international community for carrying out its June putsch. To add to the Strip's woes, Israel has resumed its assassination programme of alleged jihadists with innocent bystanders, including children, blown away in the process.
The same international community has failed to take action, as it has repeatedly done so in the past, to quell Israeli attacks.
The Gaza impasse serves Israeli objectives of punishing Hamas and putting pressure on the Salam Fayyad government in Ramallah to prevent possible political reconciliation with the Gaza leadership.
Since the rift took place, Mahmoud Abbas has received new backing from key players, especially the US, EU and Israel. Money is flowing back into the West Bank and, for the time-being, Palestinians in these territories are spared further deterioration in their living conditions.
The new government, which replaced the coalition that governed under Esmail Haniya, is yet to deliver on other promises including the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners and detainees.
The future of the peace process is still in doubt as parties are said to explore options in preparation for the US-sponsored peace conference to be held in the coming two months.
There is still doubt over Abbas's decision to hold early presidential and legislative elections in an effort to undermine Hamas's control of the latter. How will the elections, which Hamas opposes, be held in Gaza remains an open issue.
Abbas still enjoys access to most Arab leaders even though it is said that relations with the Saudis have cooled considerably after the Gaza events which shattered the Makkah accord.
The Arab League, which had decided to investigate the Gaza coup, seems to have succumbed to pressure not to go any further with its fact-finding efforts.
Nothing is normal when it comes to the Palestinian issue. Gaza is isolated and subdued but it is far from the control of the PNA.
The humanitarian portion of the standoff will continue to challenge Abbas and his government as well as the international community.
Meanwhile, the political aspect is getting more complicated with no breakthrough in sight. The question on everyone's lips is simple and complicated: What to do about Gaza?
So far the choice of talking to Hamas, by the US, EU and even the PNA, has not been taken seriously. There seems to be a feeling that if Gazans are left to suffer for a while they will eventually turn against the Islamist movement. That is a far-fetched scenario.
When the EU suspended funding for oil shipments, public sentiment in Gaza turned against the Fayyad government and the international community.
Hamas cried foul, accusing the Europeans of adopting Israel's decades-old policy of collective punishment. The same happened when Israel refused to allow thousands of stranded Palestinians in Sinai from crossing into Gaza for weeks. Many died at the shuttered border crossing.
The realities in Gaza are stark and disturbing. It is shameful that Arab political paralysis has again failed the Palestinian people. When Gaza's electric generators went silent the Arab world looked on as millions spent their night without power.
Throughout the course of the Palestinian tragedy, Gaza presented a special case for Israel, as it does now, and for the PLO. It was in Gaza that the first Intifada was ignited in 1988.
Hamas may be viewed as the problem today in Gaza, but the Strip has always been a troubled zone. The geopolitical anomaly that is the Gaza Strip will continue to challenge our conscience, as well as our political will, as it has done over the past months and years. Isolating it and looking the other way as its problems compound is not the solution.
* Published in UAE's GULF NEWS on August 26, 2007. Osama Al Sharif is a Jordanian journalist based in Amman.
span>
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)