In a lead article in the Bahraini newspaper Al Wasat, Walid Noueihed considered the last decision of the Palestinian leadership to reject negotiations as a minimal step. Palestinians have to react this way in order to counter the continuing Israeli settlement policy. Failing to do this, the Palestinian Authority would act like a cover for the Israelis proceeding with their plans to alter the geography and identity of the Occupied Territories.
This attitude is timely and welcome because Israel is adopting a fait accompli policy, which has disregarded international calls for freezing settlements and respecting other UN resolutions regarding the final status of Jerusalem, borders, and the rights of refugees. Apparently, the superiority complex that has obsessed generations of Israeli leaders has always prevented them from pondering hidden factors that may turn against them. One of these is time. "Unlike the recent past, the US - its strongest ally - is gradually losing its position as the most powerful state in the world."
Such a change, in the long run, will limit Israel's power to implement forcefully its diplomacy, and will give the Palestinians more margin for manoeuvring. The Palestinian decision to reconsider its approach towards direct negotiations does not, however, cancel the role of diplomacy in solving such a major issue as the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Syrians and Iranians move closer
"The medal of honour granted to the Syrian president Bashar al Assad by the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his last visit to Tehran is a signal to those who want to see the relations between the two countries severed," noted the London-based newspaper Al Quds al Arabi in its lead article.
It is also meant to be a message to all that any effort in this direction is doomed to failure. There is no doubt that the relations between the two allies have recently endured tough times, at least from the Iranian side, as the US has adopted a more open policy towards Damascus. This prompted Iranians to act swiftly to strengthen their ties with their Syrian counterparts. Mr Ahmadinejad visited Damascus on his way to the UN, which was followed by a visit by Mr al Assad to Tehran. Both visits were an indication that there was a misunderstanding that required a quick response.
"Undoubtedly, the Syrian-Iranian summit succeeded in consolidating the axis of Damascus and Tehran and, at the same time, stressing the option of resistance. " Closer Syrian-Iranian relations at this critical juncture will certainly have more consequences in areas of vital interests to both countries, whether in Iraq or in Lebanon. The expected visit of Mr Ahmadinejad to Beirut is likely to be the first test for the new form of the Iranian-Syrian axis.
Iraqis should decide their own politics
The crisis over the formation of a new Iraqi government has recently escalated, after the announcement of the nomination of the prime minister Nouri al Maliki through his alliance with the Sadr movement, observed the Qatari newspaper Al Sharq in its editorial. The Iraqi political scene has also experienced active Arab diplomacy to ward off interference by some regional and international powers.
"Irrespective of all these developments, and in order to avoid any eventual constitutional vacuum, we invite all Iraqi political actors to act wisely and agree on a solution to the stalemate as soon as possible. They all should concentrate their efforts to rebuild the country for the best interests of people. They should also rise to the occasion of hosting the next Arab summit due next year in Baghdad."
The Arab summit, if held successfully, could represent moral and political support for the Iraq. For this reason Arab countries could positively cooperate with Iraq in order to achieve the goal to regain its security and promote synergy among its various constituents. At the same time, we call upon all regional and international powers, which are driven by special agendas and interests, to distance themselves from Iraq. They should understand that only the Iraqis can decide their own destiny and determine who will lead them.
Strange bedfellows in conspiracy theory
"As the crisis of the International Tribunal for Lebanon deepens in light of the pressure exerted by Hizbollah on the Lebanese prime minister Saad al Hariri to abandon the case, Jordan in its turn is under accusation of service disruption of Al Jazeera broadcasting during the World Cup 2010, wrote Saleh al Qallab in a comment piece for the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Jareeda.
Moreover, Jordan was also politically harassed by three Lebanese political leaders affiliated to a regional power who claimed that Amman had been involved in training groups linked to the "Lebanese Forces" led by Samir Geagea. Perhaps what makes this series of political accusations a prelude of a campaign against Jordan and also against Egypt is that allegations related to disruption of Al Jazeera service has, at different times, involved both countries.
The three Lebanese leaders who have accused Jordan of meddling with Lebanon's internal crisis were the former head of public security, Jameel al Sayyed, the leader of the Allawi minority in Tripoli, Rifaat Ali Eid, and Nasser Qandil - all of whom are considered adherents to the Iranian movement in the region, which is also supported by a "neighbouring Arab country". * Digest compiled by Mostapha El Mouloudi
