Diab Retracts Previous Decision over Building Electricity Plant, Avoids Dispute With Aoun

 Cabinet session held Friday at the Presidential Palace (NNA)
Cabinet session held Friday at the Presidential Palace (NNA)
TT
20

Diab Retracts Previous Decision over Building Electricity Plant, Avoids Dispute With Aoun

 Cabinet session held Friday at the Presidential Palace (NNA)
Cabinet session held Friday at the Presidential Palace (NNA)

Lebanon’s Prime Minister Hassan Diab retracted on Friday his government’s previous decision to postpone building an electricity plant in the region of Salaata.

“With regard to the electricity plan, the Cabinet affirms its adherence to the ministerial statement in terms of the electricity plan and its implementation of previous government decisions, which included establishing electric power production plants, and consider that Cabinet Decision No. 2 on 5/25/2020 come in the context of implementing this plan without contradicting the others,” said a statement issued following a government session.

President Michel Aoun had asked the Cabinet Friday to reconsider its decision to postpone the building of a power plant in the village of Selaata on the northern coast.

To diffuse tension with Aoun, Diab found an exit to reconsider his government’s decision, despite rejections from the Amal Movement and the Marada Movement’s ministers.

The plan is also opposed by other political forces such as the Mustaqbal movement, the Lebanese Forces, and the Progressive Socialist Party.

Parties against the plan said that building a third plant in Lebanon requires tens of millions of dollars by the time the country is suffering from a dire economic and financial crisis.

The former government of Saad Hariri had approved a plan to build three new power plants, including a plant in the northern village of Selaata. The other two are to be built in Zahrani in the south and Deir Ammar in the north.

Political sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Diab based his decision on a decision issued by the former government and not on a law.

“The current government had already rejected all decisions issued by the former cabinet, while it is now relying on one of those previous decisions to cover the backing of the Salaata plant,” the source said.

“With regard to the electricity plan, I asked the Council of Ministers to reconsider the decision taken during the previous session, for the public interest and not from any private interest. The plan noted the establishment of three electricity production plants in Zahrani, Deir Ammar, and Salata,” Aoun said at the start of the cabinet session.

He was quoted by Information Minister Manal Abdel Samad as saying that the Deir Ammar plant is still suspended for known reasons, and the Zouk and Jiyyah plants are old and there is a need to replace them with new ones, which imposes the establishment of alternative plants, including Selaata plant.

“Since the study prepared stats securing electricity 24/24, therefore the project is of importance in relation to negotiations with international institutions, so it is necessary to proceed with the electricity plan as was planned in the year 2019, and based on the decision of the previous government,” Aoun told ministers.

For his part, Diab informed the cabinet about his tour to the northern Bekaa region, to review the measures taken to close illegal crossings used for smuggling between Lebanon and Syria.

“It can be said that these measures are supposed to lead to a large-scale of controlling the smuggling operations and we need to continue efforts, to close this file, which causes great damage at various levels in Lebanon,” Diab said.

However, the cabinet decided to postpone the appointments until next Thursday's session.



How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
TT
20

How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 

Diplomatic sources in Baghdad revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat that Iraqi authorities were deeply concerned about sliding into the Israeli-Iranian war, which they considered “an existential threat to Iraq even more dangerous than that posed by ISIS when it overran a third of the country’s territory.”

The sources explained that “ISIS was a foreign body that inevitably had to be expelled by the Iraqi entity, especially given the international and regional support Baghdad enjoyed in confronting it... but the war (with Israel) threatened Iraq’s unity.”

They described this “existential threat” as follows:

-When the war broke out, Baghdad received messages from Israel, conveyed via Azerbaijan and other channels, stating that Israel would carry out “harsh and painful” strikes in response to any attacks launched against it from Iraqi territory. The messages held the Iraqi authorities responsible for any such attacks originating from their soil.

-Washington shifted from the language of prior advice to direct warnings, highlighting the grave consequences that could result from any attacks carried out by Iran-aligned factions.

-Iraqi authorities feared what they described as a “disaster scenario”: that Iraqi factions would launch attacks on Israel, prompting Israel to retaliate with a wave of assassinations similar to those it conducted against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon or Iranian generals and scientists at the start of the war.

-The sources noted that delivering painful blows to these factions would inevitably inflame the Shiite street, potentially pushing the religious authority to take a strong stance. At that point, the crisis could take on the character of a Shiite confrontation with Israel.

-This scenario raised fears that other Iraqi components would then blame the Shiite component for dragging Iraq into a war that could have been avoided. In such circumstances, the divergence in choices between the Shiite and Sunni communities could resurface, reviving the threat to Iraq’s unity.

-Another risk was the possibility that the Kurds would declare that the Iraqi government was acting as if it only represented one component, and that the country was exhausted by wars, prompting the Kurdish region to prefer distancing itself from Baghdad to avoid being drawn into unwanted conflicts.

-Mohammed Shia Al Sudani’s government acted with a mix of firmness and prudence. It informed the factions it would not tolerate any attempt to drag the country into a conflict threatening its unity, while on the other hand keeping its channels open with regional and international powers, especially the US.

-Iraqi authorities also benefited from the position of Iranian authorities, who did not encourage the factions to engage in the war but instead urged them to remain calm. Some observers believed that Iran did not want to risk its relations with Iraq after losing Syria.

-Another significant factor was the factions’ realization that the war exceeded their capabilities, especially in light of what Hezbollah faced in Lebanon and the Israeli penetrations inside Iran itself, which demonstrated that Israel possessed precise intelligence on hostile organizations and was able to reach its targets thanks to its technological superiority and these infiltrations.

-The sources indicated that despite all the pressure and efforts, “rogue groups” tried to prepare three attacks, but the authorities succeeded in thwarting them before they were carried out.

The sources estimated that Iran suffered a deep wound because Israel moved the battle onto Iranian soil and encouraged the US to target its nuclear facilities. They did not rule out another round of fighting “if Iran does not make the necessary concessions on the nuclear issue.”