by Angela Johnson, business insider   While much of the ceremony at the royal wedding Saturday at England’s St. George’s Chapel. kept with royal tradition, much of the Harry and Meghan’s wedding was as unique as the couple themselves. One of the biggest changes were to the vows Markle took. Like Princesses Diana and Kate before her, Markle […]

By Mary Rezac London, England,catholicnewsagency.com — (CNA/EWTN News).- In 1936, when British King Edward VIII declared that he intended to marry Wallis Simpson, he abdicated the throne. Opposition to the union was strong – Simpson was doubly-divorced, and many thought she was only after Edward for his money. Besides general disapproval from the elite, a more definite obstacle stood in the couple’s way – as King, Edward VIII was the head of the Church of England, which at the time did not allow divorced persons to remarry if their first spouse was still alive. In order to marry Simpson in a civil ceremony, he abdicated the throne in December, and was succeeded by his brother, George VI. Last November, another royal engagement was announced. On Nov. 27, Kensington Palace announced that Prince Harry, who is fifth in line for the throne, is engaged to Meghan Markle. Like Simpson, Markle is an American and divorced. Furthermore, Markle has Catholic ties in her family. Obstacles which just a few years ago might have disqualified the couple from ascending to the crown – divorce, Catholic connections – no longer require the Prince to abdicate his place in the line of succession to the British throne.

What has changed?

Father James Bradley, a Catholic priest in the U.K. and a former Anglican, told CNA that because of the previous rules of the Anglican Church, Edward was essentially obligated to abdicate because “he would have been in a relationship which the Church of which he was Supreme Governor did not approve.” In 2002, a synod of Anglican bishops officially changed Anglican doctrine regarding divorce, declaring that while “marriage should always be undertaken as a ‘solemn, public and lifelong covenant between a man and a woman’…some marriages regrettably do fail and that the Church’s care for couples in that situation should be of paramount importance…there are exceptional circumstances in which a divorced person may be married in church during the lifetime of a former spouse.”

The Anglican Church does not define exactly what qualifies as exceptional circumstances; this is primarily left up to the presiding minister to determine whether a second church wedding can be allowed. One instance in which the Anglican Church forbids a second church wedding for divorced persons is if the new relationship contributed to the breakdown of the first marriage, Ed Condon, a Catholic canon lawyer in the U.K., told CNA. This was what prevented a church wedding for Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in 2005. “If there’s been no openly scandalous reasons or contributing factors, that would allow the Anglican authorities to say well, you can have a church wedding,” Condon said. Harry and Markle will be married in St. George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle. But accepting attitudes about divorced monarchs is indicative of a broader breakdown of marriage that can be seen, particularly in the West, Bradley noted. “The opposition to Edward VIII was, first of all, that society didn’t recognize divorce as something that was good at the time, and now it does, unfortunately,” he said. Currently, “(the) new head of the [British] Supreme Court is pushing for no-fault divorce. We’ve gone from a situation where divorce was such a social issue that you couldn’t remain monarch and be married to a divorced person, and now we’re in a situation where the Supreme Court is pushing for no-fault divorce,” he said. “So it’s the complete collapse of marriage as we see in America and the rest of the West.”

Royals marrying Catholics

Markle attended an all-girls Catholic school in L.A., prompting speculation that she may have been baptized as a Catholic, although she told Vanity Fair earlier this year that she was not raised as one. Numerous British sources reported that Markle was brought up Protestant, and was baptized and confirmed in the Church of England before her wedding to Harry. However, if she were a Catholic, this too would have been an obstacle to her marrying into the royal family until very recently. Opposition to Catholics ascending to the throne dates back to King Henry VIII, who broke from the Catholic Church in the 1500s in order to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and marry another, because he blamed Catherine for failing to produce a son who could succeed to the throne. The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 allowed heirs to the throne to marry Catholics, among other changes. However, the law still stipulates that the acting British sovereign mustn’t be a Catholic.

Article does not necessarily represents opinion of khazen.org 

by Talal F. Salman –executive-magazine.com– With the world’s population expected to grow by 2 billion—reaching almost 9.5 billion by 2040—one of the major structural changes that would need to keep pace is the development of infrastructure. The world is expected to need close to 100 trillion dollars worth of infrastructure investment by 2040, mainly in developing countries, according to estimates by the UN and the World Bank. This sum is required to meet the demands of clean water, sanitation, electricity, transport, and telecommunications, in addition to schools and hospitals. The sum is also likely to increase, given the escalating impact of climate change. Around 20 percent of the required funds will not be available if national economies, which are financially interconnected now more than ever, do not plan accordingly. The availability of funds is a blessing that a country such as Lebanon might not realize. While other developing countries might struggle to generate savings or attract investment in their local economies, the Lebanese financial system is sitting on 320 percent of GDP in deposits—one of the highest in the world. There is no doubt that the infrastructure in Lebanon has been severely neglected since the end of the civil war. The lack of proper investment in electricity, telecoms, sanitation, transport, and water is causing major costs to the economy, to the productive capacity of all sectors, to household income, and to the health of every individual. The deposits in the Lebanese financial systems, with the proper use of available cheap international loans and guarantees, can help Lebanon close its infrastructure gap while minimizing borrowing.

Economic Stimulus

The CEDRE investment conference on April 6 was testament to the commitment of the international community in helping Lebanon to achieve the economic security it needs and to compensate for the seven years of near zero growth, due to the impact of the Syrian war. The repercussions for the Lebanese economy—which stands at $53 billion in size currently—is around $30 billion so far, a massive challenge for any country. The support that Lebanon received at CEDRE provides much-needed confidence, and can have great results if properly executed. The right investment in infrastructure is known to boost growth—in the case of Lebanon it could lead to a 3 percent increase in GDP in the current environment. However, the Lebanese economy has the potential to grow at 6 percent a year in the absence of external factors impacting our ability to grow, and within a proper policy-making framework.

The involvement of the private sector through public-private partnerships (PPP) is important to attract capital. However, the cost of infrastructure projects that are not commercially viable and thus not eligible for PPP—$11 billion out of the $17 billion worth of projects proposed—are intended to be financed through concessional loans. This means that even if the cost of debt is low, it is still debt being added to the third most indebted country in the world (Lebanon has a public debt equivalent to 151 percent of GDP). Debt service cost is around 10 percent of GDP, 50 percent of government revenues, and 36 percent of total government expenditures, all among the highest in the world. Therefore, adding debt to the government’s balance sheet does not seem to be the best approach. Let’s take a look at PPP and what is the best model for Lebanon to use the pledged investments from the CEDRE conference to its advantage:

Firstly, PPP is not privatization, which is the complete divestiture of a public asset to the private sector, and it is not a procurement contract where the government hires a private company to construct a road or a power plant for example, or to provide a service. Even though the term is globally used to encompass a wide range of relationships between the public and private sector, a proper partnership is one that defines two major factors needed for the success of infrastructure projects—especially greenfield ones, which are new projects as opposed to upgrades to existing infrastructure. Those two factors are financing and risk. The allocation of financing refers to what portion is to be invested by the private sector and what portion is to be invested by the government. The allocation of risk determines who is responsible for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of the project.

Gulf countries, joined by the United States, on Wednesday imposed further sanctions on Hezbollah leaders, proclaiming the Iran-backed Lebanese group a terrorist organisation and dismissing the distinction between the party’s political and armed wings. Additional US sanctions targeted Hezbollah’s top officials, including its leader Hassan Nasrallah and his deputy Naim Qassem. The measures were imposed […]

by Alex Lockie — business insider — North Korea appeared to flip on the US on Tuesday with a variety of complaints and statements that marked the first real backslide of a diplomatic push for peace in Korea — and much of it was pinned on a dark, threatening statement made by President Donald Trump’s hawkish new […]

BEIRUT (Reuters) – The organizer of Beirut Pride said he was detained overnight by Lebanese authorities who released him only when he signed a pledge to cancel the week’s remaining events. Lebanon last year became the first Arab country to hold a gay pride week, though the opening event was canceled because of safety concerns […]

The Murr Tower in Beirut is decorated by the Lebanese street artist Jad Khoury with sun clothes in Beirut, Lebanon, May 14, 2018. The Tower is a famous symbol of the Lebanese civil war (1975-1990). Its construction began in 1974, a year before the beginning of the civil war, and until now this about 40-storeys […]

wagingnonviolence.org — Rayyan Dabbous — Following Lebanon’s parliamentary elections on May 6, more than a thousand Lebanese gathered in front of the Ministry of Interior to challenge its official electoral results. According to the Lebanese Association for Democratic Elections, an election monitoring group, there were approximately 7,300 legal complaints, including the removal of its monitors from electoral […]

This article does not necessarily represents khazen.org 

BY: MONA SUKKARIEH

The comments made by Israel’s Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman at a Tel Aviv conference on January 31 sparked outrage in Lebanon. It brought the issue of the maritime border dispute between Lebanon and Israel back into the spotlight and managed to catch Washington’s attention once again. Little was happening on this front after the change of Administration in the U.S. After a few months, Lebanese officials stopped announcing that a resumption of mediation efforts was imminent. Then, in October, the decision, by a Total-led consortium to place a bid for Block 9 (which includes a disputed area) in Lebanon’s first licensing round, rekindled interest once again in the topic. But the buzz was discreet, confined to experts and diplomatic circles, until it was out in the open when Liberman described Lebanon’s offshore tender as “very provocative” and urged international companies not to bid, about a month and a half after licenses were awarded. The dispute unfolded in December 2010, when Cyprus and Israel signed a maritime border agreement that was denounced by Lebanon because it encroached on parts of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). On July 10, 2011, the Israeli cabinet approved a map of Israel’s northern maritime border, and two days later, the Israeli mission to the United Nations submitted a list of geographical coordinates for the delimitation of the northern limit of Israel’s territorial sea and EEZ. Some of the points defined in the Cypriot-Israeli agreement and submitted later to the U.N. overlap with the Lebanese EEZ.

But to understand how we got here, we must go back to 2007. On January 17 of that year, Lebanon signed a maritime border agreement with Cyprus. It followed standard procedure outlined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), marking a series of points that are equidistant from Cyprus and Lebanon (median line). Point 1 was used to mark the southernmost point along this line, while Point 6 marked its northernmost point. The agreement included a standard clause specifying that the geographical coordinates of the first and last markers, in this case Point 1 in the south, and Point 6 in the north, may be adjusted in light of future delimitation of the EEZ with other neighboring States, since a bilateral agreement cannot pretend to define the borders of third states. The agreement was never ratified by the Lebanese Parliament, largely because of pressure from Turkey, which denounces all maritime border agreements signed by the Republic of Cyprus with its neighboring countries. As such, the agreement never entered into force.

But it wasn’t until April 2009 that a Lebanese commission tasked with defining the coordinates of Lebanon’s EEZ completed its work, identifying Point 23, 17 km south of Point 1, as the southernmost point of the EEZ. The coordinates were approved by the cabinet on May 13, 2009, and by the Parliament on August 4, 2011. In accordance with UNCLOS, Lebanon submitted the relevant charts and lists of coordinates to the U.N. in July and October 2010 and in November 2011. Just like the Israeli submissions mentioned above, these are unilateral submissions and do not amount to border delimitation. Israel objects to the southernmost coordinates submitted by Lebanon. Less known is the fact that Syria also objected to the delineation provided by Lebanon in a letter transmitted to the U.N. Secretary-General on 15 July 2014, saying that it does not have “any binding legal effect on other States. It remains only a notification, and one to which the Syrian Arab Republic objects”.

by lebaneseexaminer.com —Greece is expected to welcome more tourists from Lebanon in 2018, according to travel agencies that participated in the recent ‘Greek Tourism Workshop‘ held in Beirut. Organizers believe the number of Lebanese tourists in Greece is expected to rise by at least 20 percent. “Greek culture has a lot in common with the […]