“Syria’s beloved Christians, stay put with us”

Khatib with Erdogan at a Syrian refugee camp in Turkey, Dec. 30

Moaz el-Khatib, leader of the Syrian National Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, posted a New Year Message to Syria’s Christians on his Facebook page this morning.

I have paraphrased parts of his appeal hereunder:

I wrote this article and saved it while still in Damascus, hoping to publish it at some point.

Wherever I went, government officials would ask me about (Syria’s) Christians, as if we were beasts prying on everything dissimilar.

I told everyone: Christians live with us in harmony and love – not because of international pressure but because our religion, morals and upbringing taught us to be exemplary kinsfolk and neighbors.

That’s how we lived and that’s how we shall remain.

Yesterday, I accompanied Turkey’s great Recep Tayyip Erdogan on a visit to a Syrian refugee camp of 27,000 people. Never in my life did I feel such warmth and love.

As soon as I started talking of conditions in Syria and about the hands meddling in our lives and destiny, a thunderous chant broke out spontaneously. Thousands started repeating: “One, One, One… The Syrian people are One.”

The same spontaneous and rhythmic phrase was originally belted out in Douma in March 2011 at the funeral of the first batch of the city’s martyrs.

I realized we’re okay, that regardless of their outrages, we remain a great and courageous people that defy death as well as fire and brimstone while staying interdependent.

I decided to publish this write-up on the occasion of the New Year as a tribute to all the Syrian people, chiefly the Christians among them.

It is also a tribute to two faithful but deceased friends -- (Christian statesman) Prime Minister Faris el-Khoury and (Islamic scholar) Muhammad Bahjat al-Bitar; and to whoever shed his blood to document brutality in Homs, like (creative Christian filmmaker) Basel Shehadeh. It is an accolade as well to my beloved sister, Hind Abboud Kabawat…

Originally, the trigger for this article was the (1 January 2011) Alexandria church bombing and the earlier (31 October 2010) Baghdad church attack.

The two attacks justified Christians’ fears and awareness that immoral regimes -- whether local or global – saw dissent among components of a society. They alone destroy love, torpedo harmony and create hate amongst people to serve their political ends.

The bombs in the Alexandria and Baghdad churches did not only blow up worshippers but also tore the heart of every human being…

I feel at times more anxious than the Christians. I fear the onset of an earthquake if we don’t wise up.

Quite frankly, we are letting each other down as Muslims and Christians. We need to reinforce bridges between us.

Christianity was a pioneer in opening its doors to Islam and in shielding the companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

My eyes swell when I call to mind how, when Jaafar ibn Abi Taleb recited some verses from the Quran from the Chapter of Maryam (Mary), al-Najafi (the emperor of Aksum at the time of Prophet Muhammad) and Eastern Ethiopian Catholic priests in his court were so touched that they began to shed tears.

We, Muslims and Christians, have lived together in the good times and bad times. We’ve respected our individual religions. We see in each other an essential, civilized and humane component of this universe, where Syria is one of the most beautiful mosaics of religious tolerance, love, security and tranquility.

I am so proud Syria is the only place in the world where the (Aramaic) language of the Spirit of God (Jesus) survives.

Time is running short. We have to consolidate what joins us. The Holy Book says: “He has made plain for you the religion with which He charged Noah and that which We have revealed to you, and that with which We charged (prophets) Abraham, Moses and Jesus, (saying): ‘Establish the religion and do not be divided therein’.”(Chapter 42, Verse 13.)

Perhaps one of the most beautiful words of compassion were those expressed by (great Syrian Druze leader) Sultan Pasha al-Atrash in his eulogy of (prominent Syrian nationalist) Abdel-Rahman Shahbandar: “Join your hearts to ours and embrace our hearts in yours. Don’t shut the homeland’s doors in the face of any honest hard worker because the paradise of this homeland is sizable to accommodate everyone regardless of faith.”

Another example of compassion among faiths in Syria was the death of the great (Alawite leader who commanded the Syrian Revolt of 1919) Saleh el-Ali in the care of his friend, Sunnite scholar Mohammad al-Majzoub...

For the sake of Christ and Muhammad

For the sake of innocent children

For the sake of the martyrs of the houses of God

For the sake of the next generation

O Christians, don’t leave!

I beg you to stay put with us!

Signed,

Moaz el-Khatib

Iraq-Syria-Lebanon rushing to Brahimi’s “hell”

Top right: Placard raised in Anbar demands release of Sunnite women detainees

Tens of thousands of Sunnite protesters in Iraq’s west today kept the main highway to Syria and Jordan blocked for a ninth straight day.

The mass protests in Iraq’s Anbar and several other Sunni-dominated provinces accuse Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of mounting an organized campaign against their sect and of being an ally of the Syrian regime and a surrogate of Iran.

The protests erupted December 21 in Anbar province after troops loyal to Maliki detained bodyguards and aides of his finance minister, a Sunni. The move evoked attempts to arrest Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi in December 2011. Hashemi was later sentenced to death in absentia.

An attempt by Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, one of the most senior Sunnite officials in the government, to defuse the crisis ended in chaos, with his bodyguards opening fire and wounding two demonstrators in Ramadi.

The protesters want an end to what they perceive as Maliki’s targeted marginalization of Sunnites and the release of Sunnite females rounded up after the detention of their male relatives under terrorism charges.

When women in Iraq are arrested, they routinely go through three gruesome phases, starting with humiliation, followed by torture, and often ending with rape (see report).

“Clouds of divorce” is the inspired title of a leader comment today focusing on Iraq by Ghassan Charbel, editor-in-chief of pan-Arab daily al-Hayat.

He recounts how he called on a senior Iraqi official for a nameless briefing on the situation in the country.

In Charbel’s words as I paraphrased from Arabic:

Since I want to talk candidly, the official said, the situation is very bad and the days ahead are far from looking rosy.

He then pulled out from his pocket a note, which he started reading.

He said the number of Sunnite staff at the Interior Ministry that was so-and-so has dropped to this much; same thing at the Defense Ministry -- the Agriculture Ministry wasn’t spared either.

The Sunnite positions in the Armed Forces are also dwindling non-stop, the official added.

“A few days ago, a senior officer was assassinated, most probably by a man in uniform,” he blurted out.

When I asked about his expectations, he said: “The Iraqi Sunnite street is at boiling point. No Iraqi Sunnite accepts being a second-class citizen. Where would the Iraqi Sunnites’ wrath lead? Beyond what you imagine! I don’t fancy that, but I am afraid that’s where we’re heading.”

After the meeting, I felt distraught. It’s unusual for a state official to talk so plainly to a journalist he was meeting for the first time.

When protests broke out in Anbar a few days back, I called another Iraqi politician, asking how serious the unrest was.

He told me in no uncertain terms: “It is more serious than many people imagine. If Maliki persists in his exclusion, marginalization and monopolization policies, I don’t rule out Iraq heading to partition.

“His (Maliki’s) policies are destroying Iraq’s political fabric. He has taken relations with the Kurds to the verge of war and reneged on his promises to them.

“He is now driving Arab Sunnites to challenge his rule in the open.

“Add to that another split among Iraqis over Iran and happenings in Syria.

“It is in your interest as a journalist to visit Iraq because it is at a critical juncture. Sadly, we can’t now hide behind our finger and cover up our divisions by blaming the (U.S.) occupation and the remnants of Saddam Hussein.”

While the clouds of divorce were gathering in the skies of Anbar, UN reports and correspondents’ dispatches spoke of the Syria conflict turning overtly sectarian. This probably explains Lakhdar Brahimi’s remark on his return from Moscow predicting “hell” and a breakdown of Syria into a “new Somalia” in the absence of a negotiated settlement.

Taken in the context of Brahimi’s earlier call for “real and deep change” in Syria, chances are that “hell” is more likely in 2013, particularly that the Syria conflict is now on the Sunnite-Shiite fault line stretching from Baghdad to Beirut, passing by Damascus.

The winds of divorce whipping Syria are lashing Lebanon as well. Sectarian affinities have brought down the sanctity of international borders and built up the appetite for risk-taking. The Lebanese are divided over the Syrian Revolution, the Syrian regime’s future and the flow of refugees fleeing the Syrian inferno.

The “hell” Brahimi talked about won’t necessarily respect international borders that are porous anyway.

Gambles taken by allies of the Syrian regime, and by some of its opponents, are also inviting strife.

Together, the clouds gathering in Iraq’s Anbar and the winds of divorce lashing Syria and Lebanon show the Iraq-Syria-Lebanon triangle gushing forth to “hell.” 

Tehran on charm offensive in Gaza and Amman

Ambassador Moslehzadeh and the Jaafar ibn Abi Taleb Mausoleum

The Islamic Republic of Iran, home to the world’s largest Shiite population, took two steps forward this week to keep the predominantly Sunnite Arab world on the back foot.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad telephoned Hamas Movement’s prime minister in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, to acclaim “the victory of the Resistance” in its eight-day clash with Israel.

Israel launched its air blitz on Gaza -- which it says was aimed at ending rocket fire from Palestinian militants -- with the killing of a Hamas military leader last week.

A total of 162 Gazans and six Israelis were killed during the flare-up in which Gaza militants fired about 1,300 Iranian-made rockets and missiles at Israeli targets, while Israeli warplanes launched approximately the same number of air strikes on the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

Gaza watchers believe Iran proved to be a key player in the Gaza battle. “Her Fajr-5 missile was the star of the face-off.”

Ahmadinejad told Haniyeh Iran stands by the Palestinian people, to which the Hamas leader replied the victory belongs to the Muslim world.

As an Egypt-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was taking hold on Wednesday night, Iran made a very public overture to Jordan in what is perceived as another move to extend its influence in the region.

Iran’s ambassador in Amman, Dr. Mostafa Moslehzadeh, said late Wednesday Tehran is ready to supply Jordan with oil and energy for the next 30 years in exchange for Jordanian goods and “religious tourism” by Shiites in the kingdom.

Moslehzadeh made the barter offer during the Fil-Sameem (“In Essence”) program aired on Jordan's private Josat TV channel.

His comments came after a decision by the Jordanian government earlier this month to cut fuel subsidies sparked mass and sometimes violent popular protests, including surprising calls for King Abdullah II to step down.

Since the lifting of subsidies, the price of domestic gas has risen by more than 50%. Diesel and kerosene prices, meanwhile, have increased by a third.

Last year, Saudi Arabia gave Jordan a last-minute $1.4 billion cash handout to keep Jordan afloat, but it withheld aid this year, officials have said.

According to Scott Lasensky, a senior research associate at the United States Institute for Peace’s Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention, oil has always been an important consideration in Jordan’s Arab relations.

“Since the 1980s, not only was Iraq one of the largest players in Jordan’s economy, but also Saddam [Hussein] singlehandedly guaranteed most of Jordan’s energy needs at below-market prices. Oil lay at the heart of Jordan’s late 1990s trade boom with Iraq…

“Baghdad was a generous benefactor. Jordan now has a major stake in either restoring or replacing that munificence. In a bid for greater influence with Amman, Iraq sold oil to Jordan at below market prices after the UN Oil-for-Food Program was established in Iraq; in 2000, with prices around $30 a barrel, Jordan received Iraqi oil at $9.50 a barrel. Moreover, Iraq allowed Jordan, a country without domestic energy resources, to pay for the subsidized oil with consumer goods…

“Exports to Iraq reached $420 million in 2001, nearly a quarter of Jordan’s exports.

“The system amounted to an annual grant, in real terms, of approximately $400–600 million a year. According to some estimates, the benefit was even higher—$500 million to $1 billion annually.

“In the post-Saddam era, Jordan was able to secure its oil needs on-and-off from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates…”

But the generosity of the Gulf Arab oil-producers has waned and post-Saddam Iraq is now under Iran’s thumb.

In its coverage today of Moslehzadeh’s remarks, Saudi Arabia’s leading daily Asharq Alawsat says, “Observers believe the Iranian offer was timed to coincide with the delay in Gulf aid to Jordan. Jordanian official circles presume the aid – which Jordanian Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour has estimated at $1 billion -- won’t be coming at all.”

Asharq Alawsat quotes its unnamed sources as saying, “Jordan is unlikely to take up any Iranian offer. The one made [by Moslehzadeh] is akin to a political tradeoff – oil in exchange for religious tourism and political stands a propos the Syria crisis mirroring Iran’s.”

The Saudi daily says there are “several ancient sites in Jordan that are important to Muslims generally and Shiites in particular. Among the latter is the Mausoleum of Jaafar ibn Abi Taleb, the brother of Imam Ali and the cousin and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad. The mausoleum is in the town of al-Mazar al-Janoubi near Karak, south of the capital Amman.”

After Sandy, a hurricane to slam the Arab world

Hurricane Sandy on October 25 (Wikipedia)

By Ghassan Charbel, editor-in-chief of al-Hayat daily, writing in Arabic

I watched in awe superstorm Sandy wreak havoc across the U.S. East Coast. I saw homes in ruin, flooded streets, cars floating downstream and boats stacked atop one another. TV screens kept everyone informed about Sandy’s powerful gusts and storm surges, the human and material losses it was causing and its likely impact on the impending Election Day.

Nature’s power can at times be so destructive and devastating as to wreck all Man’s endeavors and inventions and send them spinning.

But despite the killer-storm pounding New York and other places into submission, I felt envious. The Americans have a state, a president and a Congress to legislate and oversee the executive branch. They have fire brigades, civil defense authorities and a president to declare “major disaster” areas, where the number of deaths is nowhere near the daily quota of massacre and suicide fatalities in our cheerful capitals.

A guilty conscience nagged at me for focusing on a distant hurricane. So I switched back to TV channels focusing on Damascus, Maarat al-Nouman, Beirut, Baghdad, Sana’a and other such “disaster” cities.

Watching the news leads me to believe a megastorm is moving to the Middle East, where it could change long-established maps and sweep regimes and countries, precipitating rivers of blood in the process. The gusts of wind and rain gathering ahead of the hurricane’s landfall are the following:

1.   The Israel-Iran war did not break out yet, but we’ve seen some of its preambles; the assassination of scientists; the targeting of tourists; the bombing of Iranian weapon and ammunition depots in Sudan; and the sending from Lebanon of an Iranian-built drone to fly over Israel. The drone’s mission shows Iran at Israel’s doorstep via Hezbollah. It also confirms South Lebanon will flare up on the outbreak, or eve, of the war. It’s difficult to imagine the United States staying out of the fray, if only because Iran’s expected retaliation will necessarily undermine American interests in the region.

2.     It’s not difficult, however, to imagine the explosive nature of the ongoing conflict in Syria. The Iranian regime cannot tolerate concomitant defeats on her Syrian and nuclear fronts. Iran will most probably play all her cards to protect her Syria outgrowth and nuclear ambitions. This war will be more dangerous than the Iraq War for many reasons, given the looming war’s multiple theaters.

3.   The worsening of Sunnite-Shiite relations is unprecedented. A look at the situations in Iraq, Lebanon, Bahrain and other places will suffice. Bloody flashpoints are sprouting across borders.

4.     Despite the “spring” nature of the early stages of the uprising in Syria, the blood-soaked conflict there cannot be dissociated today from the crisis among Syria’s constituent elements or the fate of Iran’s nuclear program or the Sunnite-Shiite estrangement.

5.   The fact international borders are no more sacrosanct is noteworthy. Whenever turmoil besets a country, it becomes a magnet for roving fighters who proceed to impose their ways, colors and slogans on events, creating unsightly scenes incompatible with “spring.” At the same time, masses that overthrew despotic rulers are disappointed to see the new powers that be sailing to the past, not the future. Add to these masses’ disenchantment the growing despair from the international community’s empty rhetoric of a two-state solution.

Everything suggests the hurricane is approaching. The Arabs are the more vulnerable side in the region. That’s why they are in the eye of the megastorm. The settling of Iranian-Turkish accounts on Syrian soil is evident. Iraq has clearly failed to mend its national unity. Lebanon is insisting on defying the monster storm. Jordan is frantically fumbling around its borders.

Poor hurricane Sandy – it barreled a U.S. region and left. It might still look like a breeze compared to the hurricane about to pummel our lands in the absence of safety valves. It is no exaggeration to say the Arabs can expect to be hit by a hurricane. They are already in its clutches. 

Islamist movements keep seeking their own demise

From L. clockwise: King Abdulaziz, Saladin, Imadaddin Zengi and Abu Hamed al-Ghazali

This think piece was penned in Arabic for al-Hayat daily by Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist now heading Saudi billionaire Prince Walid bin Talal’s Arabic news channel Al Arab launching at year’s end:

Why do many present-day Islamist movements always seek their own demise?

Why do they consistently insist on “all or nothing”?

Salafist jihadism today matches India’s Deobandi movement.

Salafis today are not even one.

It was King Abdulaziz, founder of the Saudi state that celebrated its 82^nd National Day recently, who revived contemporary Salafism. He was a true Salafi, but he was also a politician who cajoled the big shots and cultivated the minnows but always came out on top.

Before the distortion of Salafism and jihad through abuse by ultraconservatives of these two noble traits of Muslims, every Muslim activist sought to reconcile Salafism, or faith advocacy, and jihad.

Salaheddin el-Ayyoubi, better known in the Western world as Saladin, and Imadaddin Zengi before him, were like that – Salafi jihadists. Both used beyond measure tactics of modern-day Islamist movements to mobilize the faithful for jihad.

They propagated jihad through preachers and orators -- not only in mosques on Fridays but at all times and on all occasions.

They built efficient local administrations in Damascus, Aleppo and Cairo. They were merciful to people and gracious in their sermons.

They were benign in their promotion of virtue and prevention of vice.

They were also ruthless when they needed to.

Imadaddin Zengi was hard-hearted when fighting local leaders.

Saladin was not, by today’s standards, a democrat or believer in freedom of opinion and expression. Once he prevailed in Egypt (after overthrowing the Shiite Fatamids), he restored Sunnite orthodoxy in the country and stamped out Shiite jurisprudence in al-Azhar. (That’s why Saladin is more of a hero in the Arab world than in Iran). His strategic move bore a resemblance to the Islamist movements of the day, particularly the line of theologian Abu Hamed al-Ghazali as expressed in his writings, specifically his book “The Revival of Religious Sciences.”

In the end, Imadeddin Zengi and Saladin succeeded in building two nation-states that outlived them by years.

They laid the foundations for an Islamic revival movement. In addition to introducing administrative reform, they handed down a plethora of schools, hospitals, markets, castles and public facilities that are still standing today. (Some of these are currently being pulverized by the Syrian regime’s tanks and warplanes).

In other words, Zengi and Saladin did not simply lead a fleeting protest movement such as al-Qaeda and the likes that always seek their own demise.

In modern history, Abdulaziz al-Saud emulated Zengi and Saladin.

He surrounded himself with local leaders who outmatched him in wealth, political maneuver and international connections.

He was fenced in by a Great Power when turning east, south, north or even west to look across the sea to Egypt.

He also had to put up with a group seeking it own demise. His valiant military commander Faisal al-Dwaish kept striving to challenge the British, who were then protectors of the Gulf, Iraq and Transjordan.

Dwaish ultimately defied his leader and ended up dying in jail with history remembering his insubordination more than his military heroics.

I remembered King Abdulaziz when hearing the leader of Somalia’s al-Shabab pledge that his militiamen won’t stop their advance before reaching Nairobi and Addis Ababa, having overcome Ethiopian forces in their country in 2006.

Al-Shabab could have instead focused on building Somalia and sinking their roots deeper at home. Had they done that, they would probably have been ruling a stable and secure Somalia. The leader in question might have been negotiating with the Dubai Port Authority to build a port in Kismayo followed by a franchise fishing deal with a Japanese company.

Instead, he said last week his Islamist militants were abandoning their last major bastion, Kismayo.

This makes me wonder again: Why do many modern-day Islamist groups always seek their own demise?

They antagonize everyone far and near as soon as they score a victory.

In Libya, they trumped their opponents by joining the revolution. They then proceeded to desecrate graves at (Commonwealth) war cemeteries and attack the U.S. embassy.

By so doing they turned people against them, eventually losing their reputation, their weapons and their camps.

In Tunisia, they were released from jail, had a taste of freedom and enjoyed it, then abused it and decided that Tunisians, as apprentices in modernity, needed guidance. Those were the same Tunisians who a month earlier had voted into power a moderate Islamist party. They ended antagonizing Tunisians and their government who subsequently demanded their eradication.

In Yemen, they absented themselves from the transition process that removed the tyrant they were fighting. They failed to appreciate that the sea change taking place in the country presented them with an opportunity to end their cocooning. Instead, they want their jihad to last for all eternity. Their latest reaction was a suicide bombing in Abyan.

In Egypt, they stand out as first class debaters. They joined the constitution-drafting body (otherwise known as the Constituent Assembly). Instead of leaving their imprint on a historic legacy, they focused on such trivialities, as “girls can be married as soon as they reach puberty.” They will surely pay the price of their idiocy at the next elections.

I can go on recounting innumerable telltales from Mali, Afghanistan, Iraq and my own homeland Saudi Arabia. The self-interest of present-day Islamist movements invariably takes priority over the interests of the public.

In truth, these militant movements mandate acts of suicide in combat but take their own life in politics.

Aleppo battle to decide the fate of Damascus

Turkish military reinforcements heading to the border with Syria yesterday

Current fighting over control of Syria’s commercial hub, Aleppo, would determine the fate of the country’s political capital, Damascus, according to veteran Syrian writer and journalist Ghassan al-Imam.

The new strategy of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, he writes in his weekly column this morning for the Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat, “focuses on keeping control of Aleppo and Damascus only and on thinning out regime forces across Syria after their failed counter-offensive to recover ‘liberated’ rural areas in the north, east and south.”

The man behind the new strategy “is believed to be Assad’s newly appointed army chief of staff, Gen. Ali Ayyub.” His idea is to deploy the bulk of elite military forces “in and around Damascus and Aleppo, allowing the regime to keep claiming for as long as possible that it controls the country’s political and economic capitals.”

To tighten their grip on Damascus and Aleppo, the armed forces need to secure the 400-kilometer long highway that links them, including the Homs-Hama junction. This has proven difficult, despite the “ethnic cleansing” campaigns against adjacent Sunnite villages in the al-Ghab plain, writes Imam.

Regime forces have regained full control of most Damascus suburbs recently held by the insurgents, including Barzeh, Qaboun, Jubah, Harasta, Douma and much of Midan…

The political capital “has thus overcome shortages in basic supplies. There’s no big rush on bakeries and gas stations anymore. Large numbers of the Damascus bourgeoisie have relocated to Lebanon, preceded by the flight (to Beirut) of their savings and capital assets. Alawite families have for their part relocated to either their “settlements” on the outskirts of Damascus or their mountain strongholds.”

In keeping with the regime’s new military strategy, Aleppo is next, says Imam.

“The rebels’ morale in Aleppo is high, despite their shortages in weapons and ammunitions supplies. The number of armed insurgents is between 3,000 and 5,000.  Their ranks are expected to grow to 10,000 fighters in case the battle drags out for weeks.

“The battle effectively started last Saturday after a week of shelling and attacks by helicopter gunships. But the army’s first attempt to storm Salheddin (one of the areas of Aleppo where fighters from the Free Syrian Aram are entrenched) failed.”

In essence, Ghassan al-Imam continues, “that’s the situation on the ground. Politically, I would just say the battle for Aleppo would determine the fate of Damascus… And if, God forbid, regime forces were to regain Aleppo, I would lay the blame on Turkey, which is overseeing the battle from outside the border.”

Turkey encouraged and thrust into the city an inadequate number of poorly armed rebel fighters, expecting them to hold their ground for weeks in a besieged city, Imam concludes.

Separately, Turkey Monday sent a convoy of tanks, ground-to-air missile batteries and other weapons to the border with Syria to further bolster its forces.

The new buildup came as the state-run Syrian daily al-Watan claimed Iran warned Turkey of a harsh response if it intervened militarily in Syria.

"Any attack on Syrian territory will encounter a harsh response, and the Iranian-Syrian mutual defense agreement will be activated," it reported yesterday.

“Turkey has agreed with the United States on a military intervention limited to the north of Syria, specifically the northern province of Aleppo, to pave the way for the creation of a safe haven guarded by the armed gangs,” the newspaper said.

"Turkey has received very strong warnings in the past few hours and the following message: beware changing the rules of the game," al-Watan added.

In a phone call yesterday, U.S. President Barack Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan agreed to help the growing numbers of refugees - both inside Syria and in neighboring countries.

Speaking to a group of reporters on Sunday night, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Turkey might need to take more drastic measures if the regime onslaught on Aleppo triggered a huge flight of refugees to Turkey. “We may have to find a way to host these refugees within Syria,” he said, signaling Turkey may be forced to set up a buffer zone on Syrian soil to address the mounting refugee crisis.

Although he declined to give a specific number of refugees that would prompt Turkey to take such action, Davutoglu asked simply, “What would happen if the refugee number reached 100,000?”

Turkey already hosts half as many Syrian refugees in various centers.

Why the Russian alliance with Shiite Islam?

An-Nahar file photo of Russia's Vladimir Putin and Iran's Ali Khamenei

This is my paraphrasing of a commendable think piece by Jihad el-Zein, which was penned in Arabic for Lebanon’s independent daily an-Nahar:

Why did Russia get to view fundamentalist Shiism as ideologically toothless, hence a worthwhile ally against fundamentalist Sunnism that has made common cause with Washington?

Despite the Western media and American and European think tanks giving contrasting, if not contradictory, explanations for Russia and China’s solid backing of the Syrian regime, most Westerners, Arabs and Syrian opposition groups are adamant the two countries, particularly Russia, will change their positions “sooner or later.”

They insist the Russian position is “temporary” and bound to change once a “deal” is struck, allowing the Russians to drop the Syrian regime as soon as they bag a “good bargain.”

This misperception did not dissipate when the Russians shockingly vetoed a UN Security Council draft resolution sanctioning military intervention in Syria.

Nor did this “analytical syndrome” evaporate after the second double veto by Russia and China at the Security Council or the downing by Syria of a Turkish fighter jet.

Two factors explain the flawed view of Russia.

One factor is underestimation of the Russian Federation’s political, economic and military clout after the Soviet Union’s collapse. Many find it hard to accommodate Russia’s challenge of U.S. supremacy in its own backyard. The Putin Administration has drawn a clear strategic line delineating this backyard or “vital sphere of influence.” Syria, which is not too far from the Caucasus region where Russia has a military presence in Armenia, falls in this backyard.

The second factor is the reluctance to acknowledge how important and serious fundamentalist Islam is in Russia’s internal calculations. The fact fundamentalist Sunnism envelopes the overwhelming majority of Russian Muslims is a cause for concern for Russia. Ditto China apropos its Chinese Muslims.

While the first factor is understandable and expected, the second is less tangible.

It is extremely hard to find public studies by Russian research centers that shed light on the surge of Islam inside Russia. Most studies address the rise of fundamentalism in other countries.

However, the Russian psyche has been encrusted with the Chechnya experience for more than two decades, eventually catapulting Vladimir Putin to the helm. The experience drove Russia to draw a virtual frontline to stem Turkey and Saudi Arabia’s roles in Chechnya. In the view of Russian’s elite and intelligentsia, the two countries supported Chechen rebels in the Russian Caucasus.

We have to take at face value Russian fears of homegrown Islam being a secessionist force in a country that is still the world’s largest. On top of that, the Americans and Europeans have been aspiring for a “spring” in Moscow that would boot out the Putin Administration since before the onset of the Arab Spring. Their aspiration remains alive and kicking. China has similar internal reasons for echoing Moscow’s reservations.

The aim of this think piece is not to enumerate all the reasons behind the Russian position. Some of them are “classic” and well known, such as the question of strategic security relating to the US deployment of a new ballistic missile defense system in Europe and Turkey or the subject of what remains of Russian military presence on the Mediterranean coastline.

The intention is to shed as much light as possible on how Islamic fundamentalism permeates and perhaps shapes Russia’s political thought.

We’ve come to face today a real life situation whereby a Russian alliance with Shiite Islam is fending off an American partnership with Sunnite Islam.

Obviously, such generalization needs to be qualified.

Looking at modern history, Russian sensitivity to Muslim fundamentalism originally did not distinguish between Shiism and Sunnism because the ascendancy of the Iranian Revolution in the late 1970s and early 1980s gave a shot in the arm to all Sunnite and Shiite fundamentalist currents. At the time, the Iranian Revolution uplifted religious movements throughout the Islamic world. Tehran became a shrine for Arab, Pakistani and other “Muslim Brothers,” particularly that the Khomeini movement embraced the traditional postulations of the Muslim Brotherhood society founded in Egypt in 1928…

The Russians, much like the Soviets before them, were never comfortable with the ascendency of Islam. The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan marked the pinnacle of their problem with political Islam led by fundamentalist movements. Khomeini’s Iran challenged the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan alongside fundamentalist Sunnite mujahideen who led the confrontation chiefly from Pakistan.

It was thought-provoking to read in the Indian and Russian print media of the early 1990s articles written by Indian and Russian experts mutually calling for a bilateral alliance to face up to Islamic fundamentalism.

But segregation between Sunnite and Shiite, which was initiated by the Taliban before being violently amplified in post-Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the emergence under Iran’s wing of the first “Shiite” seat of power in Baghdad since the Middle Ages produced a two-ponged reality:

(1) Partial liberation of American policy from its 9/11 obsession and allowed the United States to start dynamic relationships with moderate Islamist political movements. Turkish “Islamists” from Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s generation created the template for such movements. This partial liberation has reached the stage of overlooking al-Qaeda activities serving U.S. national interests such as happened in Iraq, Libya and now Syria.

(2) A tendency by Putin’s Russia and the security establishment he represents to differentiate between Sunnite and Shiite Islamists -- already torn apart by the Saudi-Iranian power struggle -- and to deem the fundamentalist threat as exclusively Sunnite. This happened after Iran lost most of its Sunnite tentacles subsequent to the Arab Spring and the appearance of a solid alliance between Washington and Muslim Brotherhood Arabs now in authority. In this sense, distinction between Sunnite and Shiite not only returned Iran to its minority status in a Sunnite sea but also lost it the ability to be a source of change. Iran, in other words, was stripped of its Islamic fundamentalism credentials and became a force to maintain the status quo in which it has the upper hand in Iraq and Hezbollah-ruled Lebanon.

Turning to the landscape of Syria, you have a defensive “pact” -- comprising Russia (thus China), Iran, Iraq (albeit from Baghdad to Basra), Syria and Hezbollah’s confessional-military base in Lebanon – opposing an American offensive fronted by most of the Arab world.

“Radiation is leaking from the Syrian reactor”

I fancied the political subtleties in the leader comment appearing this morning in the pan-Arab-daily al-Hayat. Its Lebanese editor-in-chief Ghassan Charbel wrote it. I hope I did not lose its nuances by putting it in English

The region is living on Syria’s watch.

Initially, everyone was concerned with Syria. You couldn’t ignore her role. Today, you can’t disregard her tribulations. The scenes of cruelty she is sending out have pushed all nearby and faraway homes to closely monitor her struggles.

In that land, which is vulnerable by virtue of its makeup, location and radiation hazards, a conflict connected to the region’s main arteries is raging.

It is a relentless and merciless Syrian-Syrian war.

It is a regional confrontation that is unprecedented by its severity and stakes.

And it is a public show of force involving the Great Powers after the withdrawal from Iraq and the onset of the Arab Spring, chiefly the latter’s Libya episode.

The Syria we knew before the outbreak of protests is no more. The regional player’s grip has slackened. The cards have fallen from his hand.

Khaled Meshaal prefers to shuteye in other capitals.

Syria’s allies in Lebanon are anxious lest she would drown in her crisis and her own blood. Those who dreaded Syria’s role and her ability to shuffle cards outside her borders now fear for Syria and the shuffling of cards within her borders.

One side is anxious about a protracted civil war.

Another is stressed by recollections of Yugoslavia dragging the world into military intervention.

A third is losing sleep over prolonged and blood-drenched chaos and the fall of the missiles and chemical weapons arsenal in this or that hand.

A fourth is worrying about the waves of refugees and a meltdown of the sectarian reactor.

That’s what the journalist hears when trying to take the region’s pulse. You ask your Iraqi friend about the “Maliki crisis” in which he is involved.

His answer is that the crisis in Baghdad is serious, but the one in Damascus is more alarming and that the Iraqi street is split over happenings there.

He said he was deeply concerned “because (a) the Shiite Iraqi wants the regime in Syria to survive, notwithstanding its wrongdoings, and (b) the Sunnite Iraqi wants to see the regime brought down, irrespective of the alternatives and fallouts.”

My Iraqi friend also said, “Tehran’s worry exceeds Baghdad’s. The Syrian regime’s fall implies the collapse of an endeavor that cost (Iran) billions over several decades. It would mean weakening Iran in the region and at home.”

Jordan too lives on Syria’s watch despite its internal woes.

Jordan is caught between the hammer of the Palestinian-Israeli peace stalemate and the anvil of Iraq’s setbacks and Syria’s flames. It fears an influx of Syrian refugees and increased public sympathy with Syrian protesters. It is also in fear of waking up one morning to the sound and fury of international military intervention in Syria.

Lebanon has been living on Syria’s watch for decades. This country has an exceptional capacity to invite trouble.

The recent bloody face-off between Sunnites and Alawites in northern Lebanon is only a sample of what could happen. Much of the positions of the Lebanese on the events in Syria are undeniably sectarian-tainted. This is true of the regime’s allies and adversaries.

Lebanon shudders in fear. The Sunnites fear the likelihood of the regime remaining on its feet “for a while.”  The Shiites fear the likelihood of decision-making in Syria reverting to factions that challenged and fought them. The Christians run their eyes over the embers of minorities and minorities’ fears and then disunite.

Amidst the mounting fears and predictions, President Michel Suleiman is trying to reunite the Lebanese under one roof. He is trying to put off the outbreak of fire. The Lebanese feign busying themselves with national dialogue topics and files with their eyes glued to Damascus. It would be hard to rein in disintegration in Lebanon once it kicks off in Syria.

Turkey too is monitoring the Syrian reactor. Its radiations muddled policies it spent years formulating; it also brought about economic losses.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan dreams today of ousting his former friend. The game plan is intricate. Turkey can’t ignore the Iranian and Russian positions. At the same time, Erdogan cannot tolerate a prolonged regional civil war on Turkey’s borders.

Radiations from the Syrian reactor are being transmitted through the atmosphere to nearby and outlying capitals. The radiations have become more lethal lately. The world can’t bear that for long.

Russia herself will need to act and propose a solution to stop the leakage of radiation. It is wrong though to sleep like a log on the silken Russian pillow.