Bin Salman 'tried to persuade Netanyahu to go to war in Gaza': Sources

War was among scenarios suggested by damage-limitation task force established to advise Saudi crown prince in aftermath of Khashoggi killing

MBS was advised that a war in Gaza would distract Donald Trump's attention (AFP)

David Hearst

Tuesday 13 November 2018 

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attempted to persuade Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to start a conflict with Hamas in Gaza as part of a plan to divert attention from the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, sources inside Saudi Arabia have told Middle East Eye.

A war in Gaza was among a range of measures and scenarios proposed by an emergency task force set up to counter increasingly damaging leaks about Khashoggi's murder coming from Turkish authorities, according to sources with knowledge of the group's activities.

The task force, which is composed of officials from the royal court, the foreign and defence ministries, and the intelligence service, briefs the the crown prince every six hours, MEE was told.

It advised bin Salman that a war in Gaza would distract Trump's attention and refocus Washington’s attention on the role Saudi Arabia plays in bolstering Israeli strategic interests.

It also advised bin Salman to “neutralise Turkey by all means” - including attempts to bribe Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with offers to buy Turkish arms and statements by the crown prince attempting to shore up relations between Riyadh and Ankara.

READ MORE ►

Why is Benjamin Netanyahu defending Mohammed bin Salman?

In comments made at last month's Future Investment Initiative, bin Salman claimed Khashoggi's murder was being used to drive a wedge between Saudi Arabia and Turkey. He said that would not happen "as long as there is a king called King Salman bin Abdelaziz and a crown prince called Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia".

Khashoggi was brutally killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on 2 October, in an operation which Turkish authorities believe was carried out by a hit squad whose suspected members contained several members of bin Salman's personal bodyguards.

Saudi officials have denied that the crown prince has "any knowledge whatsoever" of Khashoggi's killing.

Some of the task force’s other recommendations were leaked to a close confidant of bin Salman, Turki Aldakhil, the general manager of the Al Arabiya news channel. He revealed "more than 30 potential measures" that Riyadh could take if Washington imposed sanctions.

He said the kingdom was capable or doubling or tripling the price of oil, of offering Russia a military base in the north of the country, and of turning to both Russia and China as its main arms suppliers.

Aldakhil later dismissed these threats “as his ideas only", but his original article on the Al Arabiya website sources these threats  to “ decision-making circles within the kingdom”. This, MEE can reveal, is the task force set up to advise bin Salman.

Secret ties

Saudi Arabia and Israel are considered to have increasingly close secret ties, driven by their shared hostility to Iran, and bin Salman has been a key player in efforts to sell Trump's "deal of the century" peace plan for Israel and Palestine to regional leaders.

Speaking to the BBC earlier this year, Netanyahu said that Israel and some Arab nations were going through a process of "subterraneran normalisation".

And while Khashoggi's killing has been widely condemned by world leaders, Netanyahu said earlier this month: "It is very important for the stability of the region and the world that Saudi Arabia remains stable."

Two weeks after the murder, Saudis government sources also noted an abrupt change of tone in Netanyahu's remarks about Hamas during negotiations with Qatar aimed at easing the blockade on the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu told his cabinet meeting on 14 October: "We are very close to a different kind of activity, an activity that will include very powerful blows. If it has sense, Hamas will stop firing and stop these violent disturbances, now."

Netanyahu said Saudi Arabia's stability is 'very important' for the region and the world (AFP)

Similarly, Israel and Qatar had just reached a deal to allow funds into the blockaded strip and pay the salaries of Hamas government workers, when Sunday night's botched Israel special forces raid, a raid which had political permission, took place in Khan Younis.

Hamas subsequently launched hundreds of rockets into southern Israel, and Israel launched air strikes in Gaza with at least 15 Palestinians and one Israeli killed in the most serious exchange of fire since 2014.

MEE cannot independently confirm whether Israel's incursion into Gaza was influenced by bin Salman's appeal to Netanyahu.

Speaking on Sunday before the raid, Netanyahu had said that he was "doing everything I can to avoid an unnecessary war" in Gaza.

"I am not afraid of war if it’s necessary, but I want to avoid it if it’s not necessary,” he said.

READ MORE ►

Gaza wakes up to rubble and funerals after Israeli strikes

According to MEE's sources, other measures recommended by the task force to show Trump that Saudi Arabia was not dependent on its alliance with Washington included inviting Russian President Vladimir Putin to visit Riyadh.

Putin is alleged to have said that he would go through with the visit regardless of the outcome of the Khashoggi affair.

Saudi Arabia has also made good on its promise to raise the price of crude oil by production cuts.

Saudi energy minister Khalid al-Falih said after a meeting of OPEC at the weekend that the cartel believed production would need to fall by nearly one million barrels per day. The announcement alone sent the price of international bench mark Brent Crude rising to $70.83 a barrel, having dipped below $60 a barrel at the end of last week.

The move was in direct defiance of Trump, who had tweeted on Monday: "Hopefully, Saudi Arabia and OPEC will not be cutting oil production. Oil prices should be much lower based on supply!”

'Tell your boss'

Meanwhile, pressure on bin Salman is growing as more details emerge from the investigation into Khashoggi's killing.

The MEE can reveal that Turkey has recordings of conversations among Saudi officials which date back to 28 September, when Khashoggi first entered the consulate to arrange for a certificate which proved he had divorced his second wife. This was three days before he was killed.

These tapes reveal that the Saudi military attache in Istanbul, Ahmed Abdullah al-Muzaini, played a crucial role in the killing of Khashoggi.

READ MORE ►

Recording of Khashoggi murder appears to show MBS involvement: Report

After meeting Khashoggi and telling him he was taking over his file personally, Muzaini flew the next day to Riyadh where he met Major General Ahmed Asiri the deputy head of Saudi intelligence and one of the commanders of the Tiger Squad formed to assassinate dissidents at home and abroad.

Describing him as the brains behind the plot, the Turkish government-controlled newspaper Sabah said Muzaini discussed Khashoggi’s assassination with Asiri and flew back to Istanbul. He returned to Riyadh at 9pm on the day Khashoggi was murdered.

MEE can also reveal that the leader of the murder squad, Maher Abdulaziz Mutreb, briefed Mohammed al-Otaibi, the consul, before the killing took place. Otaibi left Turkey on 16 October, the day before his official residence was searched by Turkish investigators.

On Monday, the New York Times revealed that Mutreb instructed his superior to “tell your boss” that Khashoggi had been killed in one of four calls back to Riyadh on the day of the murder. 

This is increasing the pressure on Capitol Hill for a formal response from the Trump administration.

The CIA and other intelligence officials are set to brief Congress this week and congressional leaders are due to press Gina Haspel, the CIA director, who has heard one audio recording of Khashoggi’s murder to testify to them about what she heard.

Israel blows up Gaza ceasefire

Ali Abunimah - 13 November 2018

I was on Al Jazeera’s Newshour on Monday night to discuss Israel’s assault on Gaza.

Israeli leaders have a pattern of sabotaging ceasefire agreements, leading to horrific spasms of violence, I told the network.

I also said that Hamas’ attack on an Israeli military bus Monday, after soldiers had disembarked, showed that the armed group intended to demonstrate its capabilities, while still exercising restraint and avoiding further escalation.

Watch the video above.

Israel carried out air raids across Gaza on Monday night with Palestinian resistance factions firing some 300 rockets into Israel in retaliation for an Israeli raid Sunday that killed seven members of the Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas.

One Israeli officer was killed as Palestinian fighters battled to resist the Israeli raid.

As it habitually does, Israel targeted civilian infrastructure in Gaza, among dozens of other sites it claims are linked to the resistance.

Shehab News@ShehabAgencyEn

Israeli planes destroyed a residential building in #Gaza City, with kindergarten and residential apartments

27

7:54 AM - Nov 13, 2018

Shehab News@ShehabAgencyEn

#Palestine : The main Israeli targets in Gaza : Homes, hotel, infrastructure, TV station and official buildings .

Palestinian media published images of an Israeli missile in Khan Younis that failed to explode, indicating the massive size of the bombs it is using.

شبكة قدس الإخبارية

✔@qudsn

صاروخ لم ينفجر أطلقته طائرات الاحتلال شرق #خانيونس، اليوم.#غزة_تحت_القصف

11

7:57 AM - Nov 13, 2018

On Monday, the health ministry in Gaza confirmed that six Palestinians had been killed and another 25 injured in the overnight Israeli air raids.

An Israeli man was killed after a rocket struck an apartment building in Ashkelon.

The Israeli attack on Sunday shattered ongoing efforts to achieve a lasting truce for Gaza.

Israeli media reported Tuesday that Palestinian factions had agreed to a ceasefire proposed by Egypt and that Egyptian and United Nations officials were due to visit the territory on Wednesday.

According to media reports, Palestinian factions had agreed to halt retaliatory rocket fire into Israel by Tuesday afternoon.

It remained to be seen if Israel’s security cabinet, which was due to meet Tuesday, would agree to return to the ceasefire that Israel violated.

Journalists who shaped South Africa

Courage shines through on almost every page, whether it comes from the often-unheralded whistleblowers or the five cases where reporters have been killed or disappeared, as well as the many instances of detention and harassment.

by Anton Harber-Nov 14, 2018

Nov 13, 2018

( November 14, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) It was a modest, soft-spoken Catholic nun from the US, Sister Janice McLaughlin, who exposed the “protected villages” set up by the Rhodesian government in 1977. The villages were ostensibly to protect civilians from the violence of the liberation armies, but were actually concentration camps behind barbed wire.

McLaughlin, using the access the church afforded her, and writing for a London-based Catholic newsletter, gave the world detailed first-hand descriptions of the poor conditions and hardships of these camps. Ironically, she implied that the camps were helping the guerrillas from the liberation armies in their fight fighting against the Rhodesian government. Other media picked up and ran the story.

Ricardo de Mello is a largely forgotten Angolan hero of investigative reporting. When the country opened up to multiparty democracy and allowed a free press in the early 1990s, De Mello started a daily called Imparcial Fax. Only a handful of subscribers got it by fax. But he began to report the war in a way that broke through the state propaganda for the first time, and publish leaks from within the ruling elite.

He was murdered in January 1995. His death was widely believed to have been orchestrated by an Angolan minister.

Magema Magwaza Fuze travelled through Zululand in 1877 to visit King Cetshwayo. His purpose was to check out stories that the king was killing Christian converts, thus forcing missionaries and converts to flee. He found no evidence of this, and the piece he wrote in Macmillan’s Magazine in the UK in 1878 proved to be an invaluable record of life in the kingdom.

These are three of the 39 stories recorded in our recently published anthology, Southern African Muckraking: 300 years of investigative reporting that has shaped the region. The book extends the canon of investigative journalism, starting with Adam Tas in 1706 through to #GuptaLeaks in 2017. The trove of emails exposed the extent of the “capture” of the South African state by business interests allied to former President Jacob Zuma. The book uncovers a number of forgotten gems along the way.

A long tradition

Each case study is introduced by an expert in the area, outlining the context, importance and genesis of the story.

Some would argue that the book uses a very loose definition of investigative reporting. Some of the protagonists were not journalists, and some wrote for outlets other than conventional newspapers, usually stepping in when conventional journalism was blocked. We felt an expansive definition was essential, given the limitations on this kind of work in this part of the world. A more traditional Western definition would have excluded some of the most important and interesting work.

Some of the stories were carried in mainstream media, many came from “alternative” media, and at least one came from a state-owned outlet. Some were the result of extensive sleuthing, some from fortuitous leaks and some from canny editors pointing their reporters in the right direction.

What these reports have in common is exposing matters of public interest – sometimes at great risk to the journalists – and holding to account those who abuse power. The book shows how rich, varied and inspiring this history is, and how powerful an impact it has had on the region.

What is apparent in this chronological account is that some of the countries of southern Africa – like South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia – have long traditions of muckraking, while there has been a surge of recent work from countries like Lesotho, Botswana.

Much of the earlier work is by individuals operating on their own. More recently the work was often done cooperatively by large groups, across borders and media types. Less is now coming from conventional newsrooms, and more from special investigative hubs supported by donors, which might free journalists from the constraints of commercial ownership, but may also leaves them dependant on the goodwill of funders. South Africa’s amaBhungane was a pioneer among these centres, but others have now popped up in Botswana, Tanzania, Mozambique and Lesotho.

It becomes clear that the digital age offers muckrakers a great deal of scope because of the profusion of massive data leaks. But it also poses many threats because of the increased capacity for surveillance and harassment.

Courage

Courage shines through on almost every page, whether it comes from the often-unheralded whistleblowers or the five cases where reporters have been killed or disappeared, as well as the many instances of detention and harassment.

At a time when at least one major South African newspaper, the Sunday Times, has had to withdraw and apologise for investigative work that went wrong, the book is a reminder that such aberrations are vastly overshadowed by the quantity of really excellent and important work.

Featured image courtesy: www.nationalgeographic.com

CNN sues White House to regain access for reporter Jim Acosta

CNN's Nov. 13 lawsuit is not the first time the office of the president and the media have clashed. (Elyse Samuels/The Washington Post)

By Paul Farhi-November 13 at 5:23 PM

CNN sued the Trump administration on behalf of reporter Jim Acosta on Tuesday, asking a court to restore Acosta’s White House press pass after President Trump suspended it last week.

The unusual lawsuit, an escalation of Trump’s long-

running war of words with CNN, seeks a judge’s intervention after Trump banished Acosta from the White House grounds for an indefinite period after a brief altercation between Acosta and a White House press aide.

After a testy exchange between the president and the reporter, the unidentified press aide went up to Acosta to take a microphone out of his hands. As a result, press secretary Sarah Sanders announced a few hours later that the White House had revoked Acosta’s “hard pass,” which enables reporters to enter and leave the grounds each day.

Sanders called Acosta’s alleged behavior “unacceptable” and cited Acosta’s encounter with the press aide as the basis for yanking his credential. She tweeted an apparently doctored video of the incident.

CNN filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington. “We have asked this court for an immediate restraining order requiring the pass be returned to Jim, and will seek permanent relief as part of this process,” the network said in a statement released Tuesday morning.

[Read the CNN lawsuit against the Trump administration]

A video tweeted by White House press secretary Sarah Sanders of CNN reporter Jim Acosta is seen alongside the original feed aired by C-Span. (Adriana Usero/The Washington Post)

Late Tuesday afternoon, the judge in the case, Timothy J. Kelly, ordered the White House and the other defendants to respond to CNN’s motion for a temporary restraining order by 11 a.m. Wednesday. He set a hearing on the restraining order — which would temporarily restore Acosta’s press credential, pending the outcome of a trial — for 3 p.m. Wednesday.

Legal experts say the network’s chances of winning in court are favorable. Although a court would probably give the president and Secret Service the benefit of the doubt if they barred a reporter due to security threats, the First Amendment protects journalists against arbitrary restrictions by government officials.

“I think it’s a really strong lawsuit,” Floyd Abrams, a noted First Amendment lawyer, told CNN on Sunday. “I think [CNN] should sue, and if it’s not about Acosta, this is going to happen again . . . So whether it’s CNN suing or the next company suing, someone’s going to have to bring a lawsuit, and whoever does is going to win” unless the White House can show that Acosta is violent and disruptive.

The suit names CNN and Acosta as plaintiffs. Trump, Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications Bill Shine, Sanders and the U.S. Secret Service are named as defendants. It alleges a violation of the First Amendment, a violation of the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees due process in government actions, and a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. It asks for the immediate restoration of Acosta’s credential, or restoration pending a hearing before a “neutral” arbiter.

In a defiant statement, Sanders called the suit “more grandstanding from CNN” and said the White House will “vigorously” defend itself.

“CNN, who has nearly 50 additional hard pass holders, and Mr. Acosta is no more or less special than any other media outlet or reporter with respect to the First Amendment,” she said.

She made no mention of a physical altercation between Acosta and the press aide — the original reason the White House cited for the suspension — and instead said the suspension was because Acosta would not yield to other reporters.

“After Mr. Acosta asked the president two questions — each of which the president answered — he physically refused to surrender a White House microphone to an intern, so that other reporters might ask their questions,” Sanders said. “This was not the first time this reporter has inappropriately refused to yield to other reporters . . . The First Amendment is not served when a single reporter, of more than 150 present, attempts to monopolize the floor.”

Disputes have occasionally flared over which members of the press corps are qualified to receive a “hard pass.” But Trump’s action appears to be unprecedented; there’s no record of a president revoking such a pass from a reporter because he didn’t like the questions the reporter asked.

During Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, the Secret Service denied a credential to reporter Robert Sherrill of the Nation magazine. The agency said Sherrill, who had been in a fistfight with one of Johnson’s campaign aides, was a physical threat to the president. Sherrill sued and eventually won in 1977, though he declined to apply for a pass afterward, according to journalist George Condon.

Another possible parallel: A federal judge last year struck down Trump’s blocking of critics on Twitter. She ruled that the First Amendment prevented him from denying access to presidential statements due to a would-be follower’s opinions and views.

The same principle applies in the Acosta case, said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which brought the Twitter suit last year.

“The government cannot exclude reporters from [the White House] because of their views,” said Jaffer. “Once the government created a general right of access it cannot selectively withdraw it based on viewpoint. Viewpoint is not a criterion that establishes a media organization’s right to be at a news briefing.”

CNN’s lawsuit, he added, “is critical to preserve the media’s ability to ask hard questions and hold the government accountable . . . It would be intolerable to let this kind of thing go unchallenged. Other reporters would end up hesitating before asking sharp questions, the White House would be able to use the threat of similar revocations for critical coverage, and media coverage of the White House would be distorted because of fear of official retaliation.”

Other journalists have been widely supportive of Acosta since Trump pushed him out last week. In a statement Tuesday, the White House Correspondents' Association’s president, Olivier Knox, said the organization “strongly supports” CNN in regaining its access. He said the revocation of Acosta’s credential was a “disproportionate reaction” to the news conference incident. “The president of the United States should not be in the business of arbitrarily picking the men and women who cover him,” Knox said.

Others have urged even stronger action in response to Trump’s retaliation against Acosta.

Richard Tofel, the president of ProPublica, the nonprofit investigative news organization, suggested in an interview that journalists band together and walk out of the White House press room.

“If favorable coverage is the price of operating within the [White House] gates, then we can cover it from outside the gates,” said Tofel, a lawyer who was once an intern in the White House press office. “I think that, as a matter of press freedom, the press corps in the room should say, ‘If you’ve redefined the rules to hand out passes only to those whose coverage you don’t object to, we’re all leaving.’ This isn’t principally a legal question. It’s a question of editorial independence.”

Deanna Paul contributed to this report.