Voices on the Wind (from Lebanon and Beyond)

Arrest Warrent Issued for Sudan's Bashir: Debunking the Arabist Line

2009-03-04T16:33:00.000-08:00

Well the precedent has been set and an arrest warrant has been issued for President Bashir of Sudan. The warrant accuses him of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and needless to say the immediate Sudanese reaction has been one of condemnation of neocolonial white interference and bla bla bla. You know the drill. I also imagine the reaction on the nationalist quasi-leftist arab street to be of a similar nature. Naturally, the interference of the international community is to be condemned, while the killing of black africans is ok. The white man cannot interfere but it is fine for the arab to rampage... Lets take a look at the following sample from the angry arab.

This arrest warrant is a joke, of course and will not be taken seriously outside of the offices of the New York Times. I mean, let us say that Bashir (a lousy dictator with very low intelligence level and a skill in turning into a buffoon before a crowd, with a history of cooperation with Western governments--overt and covert) is responsible for much of the bloodshed in Darfur, his record pales by that (if you count the numbers of victims) of George W. Bush. I mean, will that body issue an arrest warrant for Bush or any American president if he/she were to drop a nuclear bomb on an entire country or continent? Of course, not. But then again: how can the White Man resist the temptation to preach and sermonize? The White Man can't resist that opportunity.

Alright, clearly there is anger there. But let us dissect the argument a little bit more carefully.

"The arrest warrant is a joke".
Maybe, but maybe not. It is certainly useless in the short term but in the long term it is not inconceivable that we see Bashir is shackles before a court of law. It happened in the former Yugoslavia, why not Sudan.

"Bashir's record pales in comparison to Bush's ...".
That is an irrelevant argument, since justice in one case does not preclude justice in another. Moreover, it is a subjective argument and relies on where one places value. If equal value is placed on all human life regardless of its ethnic composition, and if human suffering is condemned regardless of the color of its skin, then no, Bashir's record does not pale in comparison to Bush's. On the other hand, if one values Iraqi life more than Darfurian life, then perhaps it does pale... Also, I am not quite sure how that macabre calculation worked. Do we tally up all the dead in Iraq and Afghanistan regardless of who killed them (e.g., Iraqi Shias, Iraqi Sunnis, the Taliban...) , then add all the murders and rapes, regardless of who perpetrated them and assign the blame on all of them to Bush? I haven't done that ugly math, but I am sure that even then, Bashir's record does not pale in comparison to Bush's...

"How can the White Man resist the temptation to preach and sermonize?"
I don't know. But how does that differ from the Angry Arab man blaming the white man for everything? Was the self righteous white man on horseback in south Darfur killing and raping? Was the self righteous white man providing tank cover and air support agains the Darfurians? Or was it Bashir's rule that enabled those acts? When will the angry arab stop and unequivocally condemn atrocities committed by (seemingly) equally angry arab dictators. Preaching and sermonizing is one thing. Enabling atrocities is a different thing. It is Bashir who is on trial for war crimes here, not those who preached for his arrest.

Final Points
My main point in writing this post has been to deliver the following message. We need to resist the temptation to enable atrocities by using "yes, but..." arguments. Atrocities are bad. period. Those who commit them must be brought to justice. period. If there are other places in the world where atrocities are being committed, then the perpetrators should also be brought to justice. You wouldn't release one murderer because you can't catch another one, would you?

Glimmers of Hope

2009-02-28T00:49:00.000-08:00

In the midst of the ongoing festival of the absurd that comprises the politics of Lebanon, every now and then some glimmers of hope appear.

Sometimes they are in the form of an unexpected gesture by a young minister, who recognizes the right of citizens to withhold information about their religion from the state. At other time hope manifests in the actions of those who strive and fight for a better tomorrow - one where two people can choose to get married not under the supervision of a bearded male and where a woman's rights are not restricted to what the chauvinistic societies of yore gave her.

Yet other times an article reminds you of the existence of those whose beliefs you may not agree with but who fight lifelong battles for your right to hold your beliefs and to live your life free from the shackles of religion.

Finally, every now and then, some courageous few appear from the depths of societal oppression and marginalization to fight for their rights in the most civilized of ways.

These beacons of light amidst oceans of darkness give me hope that the tide of liberty can swell and grow, until it touches those whose minds have turned to stone and those whose hearts have turned to steel, until one day all the oppressiveness of Lebanon cannot contain it. And so that its people - as culturally, socially and religiously diverse as any, can stop trampling on one another and break free from their self imposed shackles.

Until then, let the festival of the absurd resume.

George Carlin, Modern Man

2009-02-08T22:35:00.000-08:00

I was watching PBS the other day and came across "George Carlin: The Mark Twain Prize" (given to him posthumously)... Everytime I see bits of his performances I am stunned by how much of a wordsmith he was. Below is a sample.

"I’m a modern man, a man for the millennium. Digital and smoke-free. A diversified multicultural, postmodern deconstruction that is anatomically and ecologically incorrect. I’ve been uplinked and downloaded, I’ve been inputted and outsourced, I know the upside of downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading. I’m a hightech lowlife. A cutting edge, state of the art, bicoastal multitasker, and I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond!

"I’m new wave, but I’m old school, and my inner child is outward bound. I’m a hotwired, heatseeking, warmhearted cool customer, voice-activated and biodegradable. I interface with my database, my database is in cyberspace, so I’m interactive, I’m hyperactive and from time to time I’m radioactive.

"Behind the eight ball, ahead of the curve, ridin' the wave, dodgin' the bullet and pushin' the envelope. I’m on point, on task, on message and off drugs. I’ve got no need for coke and speed. I've got no urge to binge and purge. I’m in the moment, on the edge, over the top and under the radar. A high concept, low profile, medium range ballistic missionary. A streetwise smart bomb. A top gun bottom feeder. I wear power ties, I tell power lies, I take power naps and run victory laps. I’m a totally ongoing big-foot, slam dunk, rainmaker with a proactive outreach. A raging workaholic. A working rageaholic. Out of rehab and in denial!

"I’ve got a personal trainer, a personal shopper, a personal assistant and a personal agenda. You can’t shut me up. You can’t dumb me down because I’m tireless and I’m wireless, I’m an alpha male on beta blockers.

"I’m a nonbeliever and an overachiever, laid back but fashion forward. Upfront, downhome, low rent, high maintenance. Supersized, long lasting, high definition, fast acting, oven ready and built to last! I’m a hands-on, footloose, kneejerk head case pretty maturely post-traumatic, and I’ve got a love child that sends me hate mail.

"But I’m feeling, I’m caring, I’m healing, I’m sharing-- a supportive, bonding, nurturing primary caregiver. My output is down, but my income is up. I took a short position on the long bond and my revenue stream has its own cashflow. I read junk mail, I eat junk food, I buy junk bonds and I watch trash sports! I’m gender-specific, capital intensive, user-friendly and lactose intolerant.

"I like rough sex. I like tough love. I use the “F” word in my e-mails and the software on my harddrive is hardcore -- no soft porn.

"I bought a microwave at a mini-mall; I bought a minivan at a megastore. I eat fast food in the slow lane. I’m toll-free, bitesized, ready-to-wear and I come in all sizes. A fully equipped, factory authorized, hospital tested, clinically proven, scientifically- formulated medical miracle. I’ve been pre-wash, pre-cooked, pre-heated, pre-screened, pre-approved, pre-packaged, post-dated, freeze-dried, double-wrapped, vacuum-packed and I have an unlimited broadband capacity.

"I’m a rude dude, but I’m the real deal. Lean and mean! Cocked, locked and ready to rock. Rough, tough and hard to bluff. I take it slow, I go with the flow, I ride with the tide. I’ve got glide in my stride. Drivin' and movin', sailin' and spinnin', jivin' and groovin', wailin' and winnin'. I don’t snooze, so I don’t lose. I keep the pedal to the metal and the rubber on the road. I party hearty and lunch time is crunch time. I’m hangin' in, there ain’t no doubt and I’m hangin' tough, over and out!"

The First Flag of Lebanon... Immigrated to Canada

2008-11-22T02:10:00.001-08:00

On the occasion of the Independence Day of Lebanon, I thought that this gem from Now Lebanon is the most deliciously sad bit of irony, if there ever was such a thing.

In particular, the author of the relevant report , decided to visit Bshamoun and the house in which the free members of government in 1943 sought refuge from the French who had incarcerated the president and prime minister among others. In any case, to cut a long story short, May the granddaughter of the 1943 owner of the house - and the current occupant of said iconic residence - is at one point prodded repeatedly as to the whereabouts of the first flag of Lebanon. Loosely translated, the conversation went like this.

"Where is it?" She is asked.

"Its rotting but its preserved."

"Yes but where?"

"Preserved"

"Preserved where?"

"In Canada"

"Why in Canada?"

"My mother took it with her when she left."

"Why did your mother leave?"

"To be with my brothers, they are all there."

...

"Because this country is not big enough for its children."

I guess in a way, its fitting that the first ever flag of Lebanon, ends up in Canada, thereby fulfilling the Lebanese dream... of immigrating.

When Silence is Golden

2008-11-13T01:05:00.000-08:00

Every time president Michel Sleiman represents Lebanon at an international event and the press reports excerpts from the speeches he gives, I take a deep breath, sigh, rub my forehead and wonder. Most recently

He told the U.N. interfaith conference in New York that Lebanon is a place for coexistence and a country functioning as a "laboratory" of interfaith and cultural dialogue.
Lebanon is "rich in its diversity…Lebanon is qualified in having a wider room for interfaith dialogue," he said in his address.

You gotta love the way the faiths "dialogue" in Lebanon. In fact we should take this model and generalize it to the entire world. Nothing like sectarian warfare on a worldwide scale every few decades... Makes me wonder whether I am living in some alternate universe or whether the president is, or whether he just thinks that the world is too dumb to notice that his words don't match our history or our politics... Its just painful.

PS: I just noticed that the title I chose for this post is fitting - on more levels than what I had intended. This blog has been quiet for quite a while and most other political blogs on Lebanon have seen very little activity recently as well. To this blogger, our collective silence is a testament to the disgust we feel towards the situation in Lebanon. I don't even have any idea why of all the recent events in Lebanon I chose to comment on this one...

On this day (July 16) in Lebanon: 1948

2008-07-15T02:21:00.000-07:00

July 16, 1945,the New York Times reports that

An agreement on the construction and operation of two oil refineries near tripoli has been reached...
The agreement was negotiated by F.C. Le Rocker, of New York, Socony manager in the Levant, and O.A. Seager of Standard Oil in discussions with Premier Abdul Hamed Karamy and Foreign Minister Henri Pharon.

On this day (July 15): in 1958 and 1949

2008-07-15T01:20:00.000-07:00

On July 15, 1958 The Washington Post and Times Herald reported

American Troops will be landed in strife-torn Lebanon within the next 24 hours, President Eisenhower made it clear to Congressional leaders...

The decision came after a formal request from Preseident Chamoun... immediately following news of the surprise Nasser coup d'etat in Iraq, long considered the strongest Arab ally of the West.

I found this one from the July 15, 1949 edition of the New York Times particualry interesting.

Ghassan Tueni, editor of the Beirut newspaper An Nahar, was sentenced today to three months' imprisonment for an article that had insulted the military tribunal that sentenced the rebel chieftain Anton Saadeh, to death... Mr. Tueni's trial took place before the same military tribunal that had sentenced Saadeh.

New Feature on This Blog

2008-07-15T01:18:00.000-07:00

Well today I want to give a new feature a shot. Every now and then I will post, old news snippets from western newspapers about Lebanon. Mostly they will be along the lines of: "On this day in 1958, the Boontown Tribunal reported ..." Hope you like em.

Great Strides.... Backwards!

2008-07-05T02:45:00.000-07:00

I came across the recent (2008) Foreign Policy "Failed States Index" where I was proud to find out that Lebanon is steadily and surely making its way to the top of the list.

We are now number 18 on the list and by overtaking such worthy opponents as Ethiopia, North Korea, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and Sudan, we can claim the coveted poll position. We should be careful though, we don't want to slip to position 19 since Nigeria, Sri Lanka and Yemen are tight on our heels. In fact we can take pride in being much more a failed state than either Rwanda and Angola, countries with life expectancies of 47 and 37 respectively.

Even more worrying than our current position on the list, is our trend in the last few years. Taking a look at the table below ( lifted from the Fund for Peace which co-authored the index), we can see all the red arrows indicating that the trends are heading for even more failure of the state.

Demographic pressures are increasing, as is the number of refugees and displaced people. Group grievances are on the rise. Human flight, uneven development, are increasing and the legitimacy of the state is getting worse... You name it and its getting worse.

Also worth mentioning is that there is at least one component that is clearly correlated to the failure of states, as is apparent from this next table.

Our parliament having been decommissioned for so long now has contributed its share of damage.

Of course, every single one of these indicators can be explained and none of this is remotely surprising; however, the fact that a catastrophe is predictable or explainable does not make it any less alarming. We need a paradigm shift in the way politics are conducted in Lebanon. Unfortunately, any shift that is restricted to the upper echelons of the elite - as unlikely as that is looking - is also purely temporary. The only paradigm shift that will really be of use, is one that the citizens will have to make. For example... by actually becoming citizens.

Now if only pigs could fly.

Oh really ?

2008-06-17T19:52:00.000-07:00

Here's a quote from Lebanese president Michel Sleiman.

نحن نتقاسم واوروبا القيم الانسانية المعاصرة ذاتها، كالديموقراطية والحرية واحترام حقوق الانسان، والعدالة والسلام. وقد تمسك لبنان دوماً بهذه القيم الاساسية، على رغم كل الظروف الصعبة التي مر بها

Translation:

We share with Europe the same contemporary human values like democracy and respect for human rights, justice and peace. Lebanon has always held on to these basic values despite all the tough times that it has been through.

Now lets not kid ourselves, there is nothing in our long civil war that respects justice, peace, human rights or democracy. There is nothing in the events of the recent coup that respects democracy, justice or peace. Lebanon has never held on to the principles of human rights, be they the rights of refugees, foreign laborers, sexual minorities, or any other group we are capable of oppressing. In fact, we have very little to be proud of in the way of our respect for either democracy, social justice, rule of law, or any of the contemporary values that we are supposed to share with the west.

We need to be honest with ourselves and admit that we have a problem in all those areas, and if the highest ranking official in Lebanon does not recognize that, or chooses to ignore all our problems and claim otherwise, then he is only exacerbating the situation. What we need from our officials is honesty, not empty rhetoric.

Whats cooking

2008-06-04T03:24:00.000-07:00

Doha agreement, Syrian-Israeli negotiations, election of a new president, Sarkozi's visit, Syria alledgedly allowing nuclear inspections, news of a visit by Bashar to Lebanon...

Something's rotten...

Indirect Syrian-Israeli Negotiations Confirmed

2008-05-21T03:06:00.000-07:00

Both Israel and Syria just confirmed indirect Turkish-mediated peace talks "in good faith and openly". Now legitimate questions and conspiracy theories can begin about the connection to the Lebanese deal and the huge effort that Qatar conducted to push the Lebanese deal through.

Deal Reached in Doha: Great Step or a Step Backwards?

2008-05-21T01:57:00.000-07:00

It seems to be true. Our feuding leaders have reached an agreement under Qatari and Arab supervision/arm bending/baby sitting.

The Good
Some (for example Michel Murr in his LBC interview) see this as a great victory for Lebanon and the Lebanese and a step towards prosperity, and they may have a point or two. The interviews with politicians from Doha seem nothing like the rhetoric of just a few days ago, and one may hope that the politicians are serious about keeping the discourse peaceful and civilized. As much as I would like to believe in this rosy picture, I tend not to.

The Bad
For one, nothing could hide the fact that this is just another piece of strong evidence that our consensual sectarian democracy is a disaster. In fact, even if (especially if?) we disregard the shameful coup, raids and counter raids that plagued the prelude to Doha, we have to realize that it took the Arab league, the Qatari Emir, all his relationships with regional and international powers, and no small amount of cajoling and hard diplomacy to forge a deal that can only be objectively viewed as a defeat to Democracy first and perhaps to March 14 - but only as a distant second.

That our country needs foreign mediators to resolve a national crisis is a testament to the failure of the current Lebanese political and social culture. That even then, no serious issues were solved in Doha, but only a power sharing agreement was reached is a testament to the lack of a will for progress and a consecration of the patronage mentality that has plagued us for centuries. That most of the terms of the agreement are easily in favor of the opposition is a testament to the usefulness of possessing arms and using them to forge a political agreement that is favorable. Hizbulla did it at the cost of a sectarian schism that may take years to heal. That our leadership manages to polarize our public on a sectarian basis by using violence is a testament to our ever-continuing lack of a national identity. That our army's cheerleading a coup is lauded as wise behaviour that preserved its unity is a testament to the malaise that plagues our social fabric.

The Ugly Truth
The truth is that regardless of winners, losers and political analysis of the deal, the bottom line is that between the inaction of the army prior to Doha, the subsequent capitulation of the goverment to Hizbulla's demands, and then the agreement in Doha on the election of Michel Sleiman, the adoption of the (modified) 1960 electoral law for one time only of course, the absence (as of yet) of a clear statement about the weapons of Hizbulla, and the forging of a power sharing agreement between Lebanese political factions outside of Lebanese political institutions, one thing remains truer than ever.

Our constitution, the Taif accord, our parliament, our government institutions, our police, and our army, are worth nothing. Indeed both our archaic societal structure and our political culture need to be reformulated on sound principles if we want to avoid repeating our shameful history - as we usually do - in the near future. But in the meantime, preytell, now that they are reinforced, what do we do about Hizbulla, their weapons, their ideology and their methods?

Prosecution anyone?

2008-05-16T01:46:00.000-07:00

In the aftermath of the madness, I noticed that one thing whose appearance would have been so natural in the discourse of any civil(ized) society, is absent. In the rush to calculate political gains and losses and to analyze the political results of the attempted coup, to fly to Qatar to negotiate a settlement, everybody seems to have forgotten that what happened, remains at the very least a collection of crimes against the law. Guns were wielded and used, people killed, injured, terrorised and kidnapped, institutions burnt and looted, roads blocked.

Will anybody be prosecuted? Pictures and TV reports abound with gunmen's faces plainly visible in many of them. Will there be investigations ? arrests ?

Probably not. In the end, in Lebanon, artists guilty of blasphemy get prosecuted, but gun wielding militias roam free...

Early indications that the Arab delegation will fail

2008-05-14T02:39:00.000-07:00

Not that anyone had any hopes that the Arab delegation would succeed at mediating between the pro-government and anti-government factions in Lebanon, but there are more early indications that they are predestined to fail. FOr example, NowLebanon reports (emphasis mine):

12:00 Head of airport security Wafiq Choucair and resigned Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh await the arrival of the Arab Ministerial Committee at Rafik Hariri International Airport.

If true, this is more needless display of force, this time of the political kind. I read this as juvenile behaviour aimed only at "rubbing it" in the face of the government's (useless) Arab allies, reminding them of the facts on the ground. In the same vain, Future TV (whose objectivity at this point is more in question than it was before) is also reporting a heavy presence of Hizbulla members along the airport road. This kind of behaviour will only serve to deepen the rift between said allies and the Syria/Iran axis. Unlike some hopeful observers, I don't see any of what happened in the last few days as hastening a solution to the political crisis, but only precipitating it - highlighting the nature of the events of the last few days as a coup - and expanding the crisis further both locally and regionally.

I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.

The Myth of Resistance and The Myth of Lebanon

2008-05-12T16:34:00.000-07:00

This blog has been quiet for months because this blogger did not see any changes in the political landscape that deviated from previous analysis and that required commentary. Arguably, the tragic events of the last few days were not unforseeable either. They have, however, been momentous.

First, I commend the magnificent job done by Lebanese bloggers Abu Kais , Jeha, Blacksmith Jade, and others in providing first hand analysis and breaking news. I could not bring myself to write during those times.

That said, I would like to give my own take on matters.

The government
The claim that the government's decision to dismantle Hizbulla's telecom network and to dismiss the chief of airport security was the direct cause of the rampage witnessed in Lebanon in the past few days is a loaded one at best. While it is true that at some high level the March 14'ers gravely miscalculated by either underestimating Hizbulla's response or overestimating the army's reaction to such a response or both, the truth remains that the organization, tactical efficiency, and speed with which Hizbulla orchestrated its rampage indicates that this was a preplanned assault awaiting nothing but an excuse.

Future Movement
Despite that, it is also clear that the Hariri component of March 14 was severely humiliated in its own centers of support in the capital which also happen to border Hizbulla centers of support. The consequences of that are yet to be seen, with the radicalization of the Sunnis being one strong option - with whatever effects on the strengtening or weakening of the Mustaqbal (Future) movement that may carry - and the increase in Sunni sectarian anger (read hate) against the Shias in general and Hizbulla in particular being a certainty.

Jumblatt and the PSP
On the other hand, the resistance offered by the (Druze/PSP) residents of Mount Lebanon and the Chouf and the reportedly high casualties that they managed to inflict on their Hizbulla assailants circumvented, with no small price paid by their own, a similar humiliation to the Druze - for now. This has arguably damaged and thwarted a consolidation of the negotiation leverage that Hizbulla may or may not have been seeking against its March 14 opponents. While they made a strong point for their military prowess in Beirut, they failed to make the same point in the mountains and in the Chouf.

The Christians
As for the Christian component of March 14, it has been untested so far. Michel Aoun's claim is that his stupid memorandum of understanding (read subservience) to Hizbulla has spared the Christians the rampage of the Hizb is at best hypocritical. What his statements so blatantly imply is that by capitulating to the Hizb, you can spare yourself from their terror. Unfortunately this is both dishonorable and false, and reduces the previous general to a satellite of and apologetic for a group of religious radicals.
In any case, the Christian component of March 14 can only stand to gain from the events of the last few days at the expense of the humiliation of the Future movement of Beirut and the resistance of the PSP elsewhere, provided that the onslaught of terror does not try to break into their areas.

Satellites to Radicals
With regards to the small parties orbitting around Hizbulla, it is unclear what the outcome is. The arms of the SSNP and similar parties were on display and they got a chance to show that they still exist on the streets. Beyond that, they need to remember that they mainly exist in areas were they are - to say the least - not liked and very likely in the future, not welcome. update: For example, Already there are indications that Talal Arsalan (Jumblatt's political foe among the Druze) has already lost a lot of his meagre support among the Druze. A similar conclusion also holds for Omar Karami's support among the Sunnis of the North. Moreover, the massacre of Halba committed against the SSNP shows how thin the ice these groups are walking on is.

Radicals and Myths
This leaves Hizbulla (and Amal). Arrogant, agressive, angry and self-righteous, the radical "Party of God" got a chance to display its MO in all of its "glory". Most notably they unleashed all their hatred against Hariri's legacy be it in the media or social and charitable organizations. The ease with which they captured and controlled west Beirut while the army stood watching probably emboldened them further. They believed that the next step would be the subjugation of the areas were Walid Jumblatt was popular. The resistance that they encountered in Choueifat, Aley, the Chouf and other areas was probably more than they had expected and the sad fact remains that they used artillary and mortar fire to try to crush those resisting them - while at the same time accusing their resistors of using heavy weaponry against them. Someone must have been reading Nazi history. To this point they have failed at gaining military ground despite overwhelming force, and while they most likely have the ability to eventually defeat the mountain residents what remains stunning to me is their use of heavy weaponry... This all serves to destroy the myth of a resistance dedicated to protecting Lebanon from the Israelis and comitted to using its weapons to that end only. To all those with eyes, ears and a functioning brain, this myth should be dead and buried by now.

As for the reprecussions and reactions on the regional and international fronts, that deserves a post on its own, and I will leave it to a future time.

In short
One could go on and on but I would like to end this post with two quotes. This first one was from an old post on this blog dated November 2006 - which I apparently like to repeat:

In the case of Hizbulla, the fact that they have been pushed away from the borders with Israel and are separated from their arch-enemies by thousands of international and Lebanese troops might challenge their very "raison d'etre". Moreover, the fact that they are armed to the teeth with nowhere to use these weapons and no enemy to channel them against might lead to them redefining the enemy internally. We are already seeing signs of that.

The second is by American satirist Ambrose Bierce who over a hundred years ago said that

... Democracy is defended in 3 stages. Ballot Box, Jury Box, Cartridge Box.

Unfortunately, parliament has failed us and is held hostage by Hizbulla and its allies, the judiciary has so far failed to uncover and try the assassins of the March 14 leadership, and the armed branches of the state have refused to use force to uphold the law in the face of terror.

The people were left to fend for themselves in this battle for Lebanon. That is the lesson that will be learned from this episode and that may be the most dangerous consequence of all, one that may put the final nail in the coffin of the myth of Lebanon.

Fifteen Slaps to The Face of Democracy

2008-02-26T00:10:00.000-08:00

and counting ...

What now ?

2008-02-15T01:28:00.000-08:00

M14 showed that it can still draw a crowd, but a crowd does not a strategy make. What now - especially after this ?

On some old posts

2008-02-04T17:10:00.000-08:00

The wonderful recent post by Jeha has spurred me to re-examine some of the old posts on this blog and I dug up some of this past analysis that remains dangerously valid to this day. When the posts were written things may have been salvagable... Now, I am not so sure...

From here, posted in April '07:

"The reason behind Hizbulla choosing to fight a losing battle is simple: the stakes are simply too high and eventhough the deck is stacked against them, Hizbulla have no choice (short of changing their very identity, ideology and MO) but to continue in their desperate tactics aimed at preventing the game from changing...
... Hizbulla is putting its willing Shia base in an increasingly precarious situation, as the Sunni leadership in March 14 is becoming more and more comfortable with its Sunni identity, that can be a dangerous game to play...".

and from here, posted in November '06:

"Syria: Another Sunni-Shiite civil war on another of their borders, with them on the Shiite side and 70% of their population being Sunni, is nothing short of signing their own death sentence. Moreover, in my opinion, their eggs are all in one basket. Killing the investigation and/or toppling the government and/or killing the March 14 leadership while trying to avoid a civil war that might be too much to handle and to check. In short desperate obstructionism... However the rationality of their decisions and the extent to which they are cornered might prove decisive in how crazy they might behave. Still history has shown them to be masters of brinkmanship without ever crossing the line. They realize that once the line is crossed, there is no turning back."

As well as (from the same post):

"The only danger in my opinion is in the alliance of Syria, Iran and Hizbullah, not because they want a civil war but more because they might not see an alternative to it. In the case of the Syrian regime, desparation might (in the medium to long-range future) lead them to a point where they might decide to bring Lebanon down with them, or to think that a burning Lebanon might for some reason salvage their anomalous control of Syria. In the case of Hizbulla, the fact that they have been pushed away from the borders with Israel and are separated from their arch-enemies by thousands of international and Lebanese troops might challenge their very "raison d'etre". Moreover, the fact that they are armed to the teeth with nowhere to use these weapons and no enemy to channel them against might lead to them redefining the enemy internally. We are already seeing signs of that"

Soldiers, Civilians Arrested - Implications

2008-02-02T19:30:00.000-08:00

Apparently, 6 civilians and 11 soldiers (including 3 officers) were arrested in the aftermath of the January 27th clashes between the army and protesters who had "spontaneously" rioted against electricity cuts. Investigations were launched after several protesters from Amal and Hizbullah had been killed in unclear circumstances with opposing Lebanese sides hurling accusations at one another and interestingly, at the army.

I for one am completely for the rule law and support the arrest of all individuals - military and civilian - involved in either breaking the law, abusing authority and endangering or taking lives.

What is disconcerting however is that there have been several brazen attacks on army barracks and checkpoints, which according to the army "serves Israel's interest" but somehow not Syria's.

I seriously hope - but clearly do not expect - that all these "incidents" be investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice. The loss of life that occurred on that fateful day in January is more than deplorable and the nonchalance with which the Lebanese treat each other's lives and well being is more than despicable. This goes for the leaders whose rhetoric can only fuel violence, hatred and dangerous "spontaneous" riots. It goes for the army and security forces whose attempts to quell the riots are unprofressional and open the door to confrontations that lead to confusion and loss of life. It also goes for the Lebanese people who pimp themselves to the wills of domestic and foreign leaders at the expense of their own safety, prosperity, and well-being.

In any case, I can only wonder at the circumstances surrounding the investigation, from the threats and warnings that the opposition hurled at the army and its commander in chief, regarding his almost botched bid for presidency, to the spew of attacks against army baracks and outposts... It make me wonder about the kind of message being sent when some of the only perpetrators brought to justice in 2 years time are military personnel - while the people who attack the army roam free.

The oppostion, the government and especially both their supporters, not to mention the leadership of the army and security forces, should all pause to think about the consequences of their actions and about the strain they are placing not only on the fabric of Lebanese society but on the fabric of one of the supposedly secular institutions that is supposed to safeguard it - the army.

Spontaneity

2008-01-22T00:29:00.000-08:00

As "spontaneous" and mobile demonstrations protesting electricity shortages escalated into rioting and spontaneous combustion of tires, Syria decided to cement its status as cultural capital of the Arab world by blocking off shipments of food items into Lebanon.

"Interesting" developments, especially in light of the recent Franjieh rant and Nasrallah's repulsive display of barbarism and linguistic prowess, not to mention that January 23rd is approaching - again ...

Omen (and other stuff)

2008-01-17T03:17:00.000-08:00

I am not one to believe in omens but this particular crow seems to always be a harbinger of doom (usually of the political assassination type).

On a more grounded note, what is most telling about Franjieh's rant is not necessarily the attack on the "old man of the mountain" (to borrow a reference from Shunkleash), but the vehement attacks on both the Arab League initiative and the supposedly consensual presidential candidate the details whose presidency the AL is negotiating on. Clearly nothing has ever materialized from any Arab League initiative ever, so this one in particular was bound to be blown out of the water (so nothing to see there). On the other hand, it is the (stupid) honesty with which Franjieh states that the opposition does not trust Michel Suleiman that further confirms my previous feeling that the general's candidacy has turned into a dud. Of course, I could be wrong and his presidency could materialize but would itself turn into a dud. Whichever...

Either way, Suleiman should just give this Arab League initiative a chance to fail completely and then declare that he does not want the post of president anymore. His wings have been pre-emptively clipped. The questions is whether he cares.

Damascus, Arab Cultural Capital for 2008: A fitting title

2008-01-15T01:05:00.000-08:00

Damascus welcomes 2008 as the cultural capital of the Arab world.

While this may be amazing - considering the Syrian regime's track record, I find that it is a fitting title in an Arab world where the pervasive ruling culture is that of oppression of the masses, repression of dissent, stifling of freedoms, incarceration of liberals, persecution of intellectuals and brutal crack downs on opposition, not to mention political assassinations.

If the "culture" that permeates the Arab ruling classes is to be celebrated, then what better capital than Damascus.

2007 Remembered

2007-12-31T13:39:00.000-08:00

Another difficult year for Lebanon has come and gone and as we lay 2007 to rest I thought it may be meaningful to look back at some of the events that shook the country.

A lot of the referencing has been done courtesy of Abu Kais and Blacksmith Jade, I hope you guys don't mind.

Please feel free to leave a comment reminding me of any events that I may have missed and to correct any dating errors.

Hopefully we get a better 2008!

January
January 23, 2007
Opposition alliance (March 8) riots

January 25, 2007
Pro-government and Pro-opposition supporters clash in Beirut. Several killed.

Donors pledge 7.6 billion dollars to Lebanon to aid in July war reconstruction.

February
Feb 8, 2007:
Lebanese and Israeli Armies Clash on Border (see here and here)

Feb 13, 2007:
Ain Alaq Bombings

Feb 14, 2007:
March 14 Alliance Commemorates Hariri, Large Demonstration, Speeches

April
April 27, 2007:
Ziad Qabalan (24) and Ziad Ghandour (12) found dead near Jadra. The two youths were murdered. The killers have yet to be apprehended.

May
May 20, 2007:
Explosion in Ashrafieh , casualties reported.

May 21,2007:
Explosion in Verdun

May 22,2007:
Fighting continues in Nahr-el-Bared

May 23, 2007:
Explosion in Aley

May 30, 2007:
UNSC 1757 is born.

June
June 2, 2007:
Clashes continue in Nahr-el-Bared

June 4, 2007:
Explosion in Zouk industrial area

June 13, 2007:
Walid Eido assasinated. Many killed.

June 20, 2007:
Syria closes border crossing with Lebanon.

June 24, 2007:
Unifil targeted in road-side bombing. 6 peacekeepers killed.

June 29, 2007:
Fighting continues in Nahr-el-Bared.

July
July 16, 2007
Unifil targeted again

August
August 6, 2007
Aoun candidate victorious in Metn by-elections

August 25, 2007
Fighting continues in Nahr-el-Bared. Families of "militants" evacuated.

September
September 3, 2007
Army declares victory in Nahr-el-Bared. 163 Lebanese soldiers fall.

September 10, 2007
Shaker El Abssi confirmed to have fled
September 19, 2007
Antoine Ghanem assassinated. Many casualties reported.

October
October 2, 2007
Fires rage all over Lebanon. Arson suspected.

October 25, 2007
Fires return.

November
November 22, 2007
"Independence" Day

November 23, 2007
Lahoud's term ends. Lahoud leaves Baabda.

December
December 12, 2007
Brigadier General Francois Hajj assassinated. Hajj had been strong contender to replace Michel Sleiman in top army position.

December 29, 2007
Lebanese presidential election postponed for eleventh time.

Reassessment ?

2007-12-23T02:24:00.000-08:00

Preamble
I have had a hard time posting anything of value lately, mostly because the situation in Lebanon is so downright repulsive that I could not bring myself to sit down and write anything useful that the Lebanese blogosphere has not already successfully and repetitively tackled...

Perhaps at the risk of breaking that trend, in this post I intend to briefly examine the current impasse in Lebanon from the context of the power struggle between the various political factions in Lebanon, the regional players, and the international ones, as well as the interplay among them.

For anyone who reads this post, I ask that you be patient with me as I try to dissect the situation and that you keep in mind that I am doing this as much for my understanding of the Lebanese impasse as for anything else.

Zoom Out
It may be quite useful to take the current delays in voting in a new president as simply another skirmish in the battle for Lebanon. Clearly the battle for Lebanon, from an international perspective, is to be taken in the context of the diplomatic war being waged between Syria and Iran on one hand and the West on the other. Nothing has changed from that perspective. Except that the momentum seems to have shifted, for various reasons.

Rewind
In particular, in the immediate aftermath of the Hariri assassination and the ensuing intense international and local Lebanese pressure the momentum was clearly in favor of the March 14 movement and its international sponsors thereby forcing the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon. Furthermore, the Mehlis era of the international investigation put extreme pressure on the Syrians and on their March 8 allies placing them in a distinctively defensive position. March 14 managed to consolidate some gains with a government composed mainly of their people but failed miserably to push the envelope any further by ousting Lahoud.

Since then, blunder after blunder on the March 14 side and a cooling of the pressure put by the international investigation under Brammertz led to the momentum slowly shifting to the March 8 side. Moreover, the aftermath of the July war between Hezbollah and Israel has proved to be a particularly miserable time for the March 14'ers with the offensive shifting to the opposition which even tried (and failed) to topple the government.

Fast Forward
After the continuing ebb and flow between government and opposition, and more generally between March 14 and March 8, and more globally between the West and the Syro/Iranian axis, there seems to be a certain equilibrium that has been reached, a certain balance of power. The trenches are dug and the opposing sides are unable to gain much ground.

Zoom In
While the internal balance of power is understandable given everything that has happened and the possible incompetence of March 14 in managing the crisis to their favor, one question that remains is whether it would be possible for them to regain the upper hand?

The Big Picture
Well, to answer that question, one must look at the current stalemate and examine the possible ways to break it, but more importantly one must understand that any risk taken could result in defeat rather than victory. Thus it becomes important to assess the possible gains in taking any risky maneuvers, weighing them against the risk factor and making an educated guess as to whether the maneuver is worth it. Finally, it is imperative that the decision reached be based upon a sober analysis of the above factors.

In the Blue Corner
As far as March 8 is concerned, the strategy that they are employing is mainly summarized by: impede, impede, impede. In the background, plan B lurks (whether or not it would be put into action) and the March 14ers know it. More precisely, in case March 14 chooses to try something that March 8 considers bold or threatening, the M14ers have to do it with the implicit threat of civil disorder - or worse - by their opponents and the tightly controlled Hizbollah crowd.

While they impede and hold their opponents in check with the threat of chaos, the M8ers don't really have a victory strategy apart from waiting for the current parliament to either finish its 4 year mandate or for enough M14 MP's to spontaneously combust so that the majority in parliament shifts.

In the Red Corner
On the other hand, the M14 cards have quickly run out, and all they can do is threaten with a 50+1 election of a new president or with a government initiated amendment of the constitution in favor of an army chief who at best is an unknown commodity. The latter option is being impeded, while the former is held in check with the opposition's implicit threat of chaos.

Thus, it is most likely that the internal balance cannot be broken without outside assistance that has to be real, understood, appraised and efficiently utilized.

Weight of the Supporting Cast
Clearly the M8ers have solid political and logistic support from the Syrians and solid political and financial support from the Iranians. However, they are incapable of helping their allies deliver a KO to the March 14ers for fear of international retribution. Thus the M8ers support is real, understood, appraised and insufficient for a KO.

Similarly, March 14 has (semi-?)solid international support and (weak ?) Arab support that keeps the opposition from leveraging its external allies/sponsors' superior financial and logistic support into a clear victory. However, for one reason or another March 14 seems incapable of leveraging its own external support into victory. Namely, their own indecisiveness has proven crippling, and the constant European and occasional American engagement of Syria has possibly instilled doubt into the March 14ers minds and made them refrain further from any bold gestures. Thus, March 14 knows it is supported but does not know for sure how much, or how far its international supporters would back it should chaos erupt, or how useful such support would be. Moreover, even if it does understand all of that, M14 may not be willing to live with the consequences of chaos. All that uncertainty seems to be crippling M14 which seems to be just dancing around the ring waiting for their opponent to slip up. Their time would be better spent waiting for Godot.

Assessment: In Brief
It is thus more and more clear that this is not a time where a clear victory can be expected from (and by) either side. The crisis is being managed and political battles are being fought slowly, with a backdrop of assassinations and possible (real/perceived) instability. It seems that those are the now accepted rules of the game. In any case, now that the president will be either the increasingly unlikely army general or an inconsequential other, the opposition seems resigned to live with the M14 government while trying to haggle for position in the next.

Back to The Future
Moreover, as the clock ticks on the international tribunal, the presidential election, and the ensuing government, the current parliament trudges slowly closer to the end of its term without a viable electoral law in place. As that further deadline looms closer and closer, and as the regional and international players fail to force the other side's hand, the only internal possibility to break the stalemate seems to be either a bold M8 move in the direction of chaos, or a bold M14 move in the direction of electing a 50+1 president that is not Suleiman - or both. Of course, another distinct possibility is a gradual softening of stances from some of the individual components of one side or both sides, maybe even leading to realignment...

Reassessment: In Briefer
The most likely option, based on the above, is more of the same. Meanwhile, the players seem to accept the new rules of the game, and will most likely play by them. It is still a stare down.

Presidential Musings

2007-11-30T03:18:00.001-08:00

Aside from the rightful and righteous indignation that many bloggers are displaying around the nomination of Michel Sleiman as a consensus candidate, both the timing of the move and its nature sparked some questions and observations that I found interesting.

1- Purely out of interest, I am just wondering what rabbit out of the hat are our beloved MPs going to pull to amend the constitution, when constitutionally they cannot amend the constitution this time - one time only or otherwise. In other words, not only is it deplorable that they are considering the same trick that our overbearing neighborly previous occupier (you know which one I am talking about) used to pull, but it is also explicitly illegal this time.

2- How on Earth can there be no audible cries of indignation from within M14 (say from the nominees whose candidacy is being scuttled) or especially from within the M14 crowd - say from the 1% that actually demonstrated a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away, for something rather than somesect or someone. Oh right, those 1% where guided by principles personified in assassinated journalists, and arguably even led by said assassinated journalists...

3- How about that timing? I mean Sleiman's candidacy was up for discussion when it was still possible to legally disregard the constitution and amend it for one time only, for the 4th time in a row. Why was it inconceivable back then and why is it ok now. What changed ?

4- Which brings us to Annapolis. The big unknown as far as I am concerned. There are fears that some sort of deal was struck between the US and Syria with the Saudis having some hand in it. Who the hell knows.

5- Of course, there is also the distinct possibility that M14 (read the big 3 in M14) having gotten rid of Lahoud (as in by virtue of the passage of time) without him reverting to trigerring the formation of a second government, felt that it had won a minor (major ?) victory and hence felt that it was capable of compromising a little bit with the opposition. You know, with the president having no powers save from stalling the passage of time - who in M14 really cares ?

6- But then again, why Michel Sleiman? I mean fine, he is widely respected bla bla, but he is also not constitutionally allowed to run, and parliament is not allowed to mess with the constitution at this time - not that, this would stop Lebanese parliamentarians, the eternal guardians of the republic, the constitution and the rule of law. But I digress. So if you are M14, why pick a maneuvre that is so morally and legally weak, on the grounds of averting a civil war. Especially when I am sure that out of at least tens of thousands of eligible (and apparently willing) Maronites, there must be one other candidate who can avert the threat of civil war, i.e. be non-threatening to Hizbulla and Syria...

It all just doesn't make sense to me, and my feeling is that this won't go through. Of course I am basing my argument on the premise that nothing substantial has changed. Otherwise, in such a short time, much has changed on the international, regional and possibly national levels that we don't know about and that our politicians feel that they do.

Metastable

2007-11-12T16:59:00.000-08:00

Slightly off the general trend of my posts, but I was recently reading Asimov's Prelude to Foundation, and came across this quotation, the conclusions of which seem so self-evident, the question so relevant. And yet...

It seems to me that no sane man wants to uphold a ... system that maintains itself by fostering mutual hatred and suspicions. Even when it seems to work, it can only be described as metastable; that is, too apt to fall into instability in one direction or another. But the question is, how can we help? ...

On Compromise

2007-11-02T11:51:00.000-07:00

It is naive to assume that a compromise or "consensus" president is anything but ridiculous. Simply put, the objective of a compromise is to achieve a working solution that is somewhat satisfactory to both sides.

1- To be able to understand what is satisfactory to someone, you have to be able to understand their objectives. Which brings us to why a so-called compromise with Syria via her allies is not only naive, but also counterproductive. Anyone who believes that anything short of the complete elimination of the tribunal, and of hegemony over Lebanon would be satisfactory to the Syrian regime is delusional. As such, compromising now is tantamount to giving them a new tool to exert pressure on Lebanon for another 6 yrs.

2- On the other hand, "consensus" on the part of March 8 cannot mean anything less than a lame-duck president who will agree to "protect" the resistance and their ever increasing arsenal of weapons, and hence ignore the elephant in the room for another six years.

3- Not to mention that a consensus president is a slap in the face of actual democracy (as opposed to the farcical least common denominator consensual democracy), and a concession to a policy of assassination and terror, whereby a working majority whose members are being picked off one by one decides to concede defeat, forfeit its right to exercise its majority, and "voluntarily" hands over power as the other side threatens civil war.

4- Moreover, the question of consensus between March 14 and March 8 is rather silly. We all know that the maximum that they can achieve, if anything at all, is agree on a name. In all likelihood, the person whose name they agree on - our next president - will be an inconsequential fool with no popular support whatsoever. Thus making an almost ceremonial position whose only real power is to impede even more ceremonial.. Of course, by compromising here, M14 is opening the door to the next question, that of a national unity government, on which they will have to compromise again in the face of threats of unrest and civil war - in other words blackmail.

5- Needless to say that the "compromise" president, if the necessary 4 members of the majority are assassinated before a new government is formed, or after a national unity government where the opposition resigning would fell the government, would be obliged to consult with parliament on the name of a new prime minister. Of course at that time, the majority may have shifted and we would have a pro-Syrian PM and a useless president.

6- As for the pros of consensus, well that would ensure that nobody would make good on their threats of unrest and war for the short term.

On Inevitability - Lebanon

2007-10-14T01:42:00.000-07:00

It has been relatively clear that Lebanon is headed on a spiralling path - back to revisit its own tragic past. The new generation destined to repeat the tragedies of their fathers and forefathers albeit with a new twist or two... My problem is not with the inconsistencies that the Lebanese have inherited, but that once again, Lebanon comes face to face with its contradictions and only realizes it when its too late to mend.

That aside, and all international politics aside for a second; the "program" of Hezbollah, for example, has never been in line with the "vision" of Lebanon as a tolerant country and a home to (oppressed) minorities. On the other hand, the Lebanese themselves have never acted in line with that vision and in fact often act against it when given the chance. Our history is riddled with instances of one or two minorities oppressing the others, and I don't recall there ever being a period of internal harmony. This is simply because the "ideologies" and programs of the minorities run so opposed to one another. Given the chance, why not impose your will and your program - especially since the ideologies cannot coexist peacefully?

Naturally, no stable equilibrium can be achieved when there are forces pulling in different directions so strongly that the very fabric of the state is compromised.

And while the Syrians (i.e., the regime) made a living in Lebanon out of directing these forces inwards or neutralizing them to keep the country "lucrative" - politically by remaining relevant on the international scene and financially through corruption - they are no longer physically there, so they now exert an external force of their own. They understand the inconsistencies in Lebanon very well, only this time it serves them to tear Lebanon apart.

Contrary to popular belief, I doubt that left to their own devices the Lebanese would do more than oppress each other. Viewed from that light, external politics are minor in that they cannot prevent the conflict that is so inherent to the fabric of the little country. What international players can do, however, is influence the result - and aftermath - of the seemingly impending clash.

Whether things can be resolved peacefully depends on whether any side would agree to lose peacefully, which is clearly not only doubtful but answered in the negative, both historically and more recently.

The conclusion is clear, I just don't think anyone of us can stomach mouthing it.

Mind Over Matter

2007-08-17T22:08:00.000-07:00

"When you don't mind, it doesn't matter!" ... The problem is when you do mind, but it still doesn't matter, for reasons completely out of your control.

Something to Consider: Brammertz resigns ICC position

2007-06-19T02:55:00.001-07:00

Something worth noting:

Belgian jurist Serge Brammertz stepped down Tuesday as deputy prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague to focus on his work as the head of the UN probe into the killing of former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri.

If his Hariri investigation was going nowhere, or if it seemed like it was not going to lead to prosecution soon, you'd think this prosecutor would have kept his ICC job, no ?

Bleak...

2007-06-14T02:05:00.000-07:00

From the infiltration of SyroQaedic groups to Lebanon, to the war that one of them is waging against the Lebanese army in the north, to the assassination of yet another member of the March 14 alliance, to the spree of sporadic bombing of Lebanese towns, to the growing possibility of more unrest from Syrian supported Islamic or puppet Palestinian groups, the Syrian regime is feeling the heat, and is turning it on Lebanon.

Meanwhile, Lebanon stands helpless. With every bomb exploding, every civilian, every soldier, every politician, or every journalist killed, the feeling of helplessness grows and the gap that divides the Lebanese grows with it into an everwidening schism.

March 14 stands helpless, with no real plan, clawless and toothless, unable and unwilling... March 8 stands silent despite the noise it makes, refusing to appease, unrelenting in its obstructionism, complicit...

All the while, whatever diabolical scheme that our brotherly neighbors have hatched for the destruction of Lebanon comes to dark fruition.

Regardless of whatever eventually happens in Syria or to its regime, I am not sure that the fragile fabric of Lebanese society can recover...

Everything seems to point towards an increase in violence and an increase in the turmoil, with chaos peaking around the time of the presidential election... The question that looms large is whether or not Lebanon can survive in one piece (assuming it still is in one piece) till then and more ambitiously past that, or whether we are looking at a Gaza like future...

On Inevitability - Revisited

2007-05-25T02:36:00.000-07:00

In a previous post, I tried to tackle the issue of the inevitability of certain outcomes, once something monumental takes place. Saddam's eventual (violent) demise was one example I had in mind, and I tried to extrapolate to Iran. My point was that if Iran continues to play this game of cat and mouse with the international community, namely the Americans, eventually it will pay the price - in the form of military intervention ( whether American or Israeli... ).

In any case, in this post the "inevitability" that I have in mind is slightly different in nature. I have been pre-occupied with the inevitability of the Syrian regime being a detrimental force in the region for as long as it exists (hence the inevitability of its own demise- but that is not my point for the moment).

Michael Totten , in the comments section of a recent post on his blog insightfully states that "... the Syrian regime wouldn't survive without being in a state of cold war or proxy war with Israel. It can't survive peace, and it can't survive hot war."

In fact, the Syrian regime of the Assads has a history (and a method of survival) of living in the grey area between peace and war with Israel.

In the era prior to the Hariri assassination, the Syrians could not afford to sign peace with Israel, lest they lose their pretext for occupying Lebanon. After all, what are the Golan Heights, economically and politically, compared to their smaller neighbor.

In the era following the Hariri assassination, the Syrians inevitably lost Lebanon, but does that mean that they can negotiate a peace with Israel? I really wonder. It seems that the number one priority for the Syrians right now is regime survival at any cost - to Syria's neighbors of course. From acting as a transit route and haven for terrorists heading to Iraq, to inflaming the situation in the Palestinian territories via its manipulation (in conjunction with every one's favorite Mullocracy) of Palestinian factions, to inciting its allies in Lebanon to unreasonable escalation, to exporting Jihadi terrorists to Lebanon as well (as highlighted by the tragic events in Lebanon this week)... the Syrian regime has to ensure its survival by making itself "relevant".

By doing so, however, the Syrians may have become too relevant. It is becoming more and more understood that one of the main common factors of the three unstable neighbours of Syria, is ... well ... Syria. The regime wants to negotiate, and as the Americans refuse to negotiate, the regime raises the stakes higher and higher.

Eventually, one of two things will happen - one more likely than the other of course.

Either the Americans and the Europeans will concede, handing Lebanon back to the Syrians, and naturally emptying the international tribunal on the Hariri killing of any substance, paving the way to the Syrian signing of peace with Israel. In return, the Syrians will tighten border security, expel Hamas and co from Damascus, cut off logistic and political support for Hizbulla, and so on...

I see such an outcome as unlikely, others may disagree (more on this in a later post).

The other possible eventuality is that as the Syrians dig deeper into this ever spiralling game of sowing uncertainty and instability in their surroundings, they risk severe blow back. After all, three neighboring countries in a (current/possible future) state of civil war, will inevitably have consequences on the Syrian interior. More importantly (on the short term), the more the Syrians make themselves "relevant", the more their "peskiness" becomes a threat. And as that happens there will be an ever growing bulls-eye on the regime's back.

In the meantime, they have no choice. Syrian Peace with Israel without the regime regaining Lebanon or at least resolving the tribunal issue is impossible. By the same token, war with Israel is regime suicide... but so is an indictment of regime officials in a tribunal on the assassination of a former prime minister of a neighboring country.

Consequently, destabilizing Lebanon is a priority for Syria; the tribunal -to them-must become irrelevant, or at least negotiable. Viewed from that lens, the recent madness they unleashed from the refugee camps in (for now) the north of Lebanon and the sporadic explosions rocking Lebanon's cities become less surprising though no less appalling, or despicable...

An eventuality to ponder on here is whether or not the (alleged (for now)) Syrian assassination of Hariri will prove to be the fatal mistake that will eventually be the Assads' undoing - just as the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was Saddam's eventual undoing - despite all the macabre maneuverings of the Syrian regime at the expense of the blood of the innocent in at least three of its neighboring countries...

The cost of political dissent in Syria*

2007-05-14T01:48:00.000-07:00

Sigh:

BEIRUT - Six leading opposition figures jailed in Syria warned on Tuesday that the “repressive climate” in their country was worsening and called for the release of all political prisoners.
“Our situation as prisoners of conscience is part ... of the crisis of public freedoms and human rights in Syria, which started with the state of emergency imposed 44 years ago,” they said in a joint letter from Adra prison near Damascus.
“The crisis has reached its climax today, with increased repression and suppression of freedoms,” they wrote in the letter published in Lebanon’s leading An-Nahar newspaper.
The signatories are Anwar Bunni, Michel Kilo, Kamal Labwani, Mahmud Issa, Faeq al-Mir and Aref Dalila. The newspaper did not disclose how the letter was smuggled out of the Syrian prison.

Dr. Kamal Labwani:
sentence: life time in prison with hard labor (reduced to 12 yrs)
charge : “undermining national security”

Michel Kilo:
sentence: three years in prison
charge: “spreading false information, encouraging sectarian strife and weakening national sentiment”

Mahmoud Issa:
sentence: three years in prison
charge: “spreading false information, encouraging sectarian strife and weakening national sentiment”

Aref Dalila:
sentence: ten years in solitary confinement

Anwar al-Bunni:
sentence: five years in prison
charge: “spreading hostile information and joining an illegal political group.”

Faek al-Mir:

*information partly from here

hahaha

2007-05-10T17:40:00.000-07:00

From Annahar's front page... For some reason I find it hilarious. :):):)

"Spare a Thought..."

2007-05-07T11:45:00.000-07:00

Nothing but support for this message from Jeha and for the subjects of his message.

On the Presidency

2007-05-05T02:17:00.000-07:00

While it may be true that there we will see some level of perpetuation of the political paralysis in Lebanon even after Lahoud's term is over, it is also true that Lahoud himself has been an exceptional obstruction. Moreover, it is true that with the coming end of his term, Lebanon has to potentially deal with a new crisis stemming from the very divisive issue of electing a new president.

As previously mentioned, Lahoud has been a huge obstructive factor in Lebanese political affairs. He has refused to sign many many bills, refused to accept many foreign ambassadors (while he has also not outright rejected them), impeded the appointment of Lebanese ambassadors to foreign countries and obstructed the hiring and promotion of high level public servants, and so on and so forth...

That could all change with a vacant presidency or a March 14 president.

Moreover, huff and puff and do what they may, March 8 realizes that the government is legit. The constitution is clear and everything else is propaganda^. In fact, what we are seeing on their part is desperate politics. Hizbulla is desperate to protect its Syrian ally/master from the tribunal and to protect itself from the possible evolution (for better or worse) of Lebanon and its transition into a stable (?) post Syrian era. It needs to find a formula that guarantees its ability to operate within a framework as similar as possible to the one it operated in during the Syrian era. They are fighting tooth and claw for that.

Similarly, Aoun is desperate because he is seeing the deadline for the presidency approach and his chances for the post are not increasing.

Both are fighting an uphill battle against the forward motion of time.

But what can they all do? The March 8 alliance knows that within the rules of the game, i.e, the constitution, all they can ever hope to do is impede the election of a president, pending an agreement or compromise that does not seem likely, or that will come at Aoun's expense. As I might have mentioned before, that vacuum in the presidency leaves the president's authority in the cabinet's hands*. That explains one aspect of the need that the March 8 alliance sees for "breaking" the cabinet by denying it legitimacy and trying to force it to resign.

But once again, then what? March 8 until now has no constructive strategy from within the bounds of the constitution and the law.

Not to be restricted by such ridiculous things as laws and constitutions, their alternatives are simple. Early elections, transforming Lebanon's parliamentary system into a presidential one (for one time only of course)...

At this point, I give up...

March 8 must know that their demands are unreasonable and more importantly unacceptable to the "ruling majority". What matters now is that the presidential endgame is approaching. However, try as I might I can't find a logical strategy that March 8 can pursue in the endgame.

Short of spreading chaos.

Footnotes From the Lebanese Constitution:

^
- المادة 95 (المعدلة بالقانون الدستوري الصادر في 9/11/1943 وبالقانون الدستوري الصادر في 21/9/1990) على مجلس النواب المنتخب على أساس المناصفة بين المسلمين والمسيحيين اتخاذ الإجراءات الملائمة لتحقيق إلغاء الطائفية السياسية وفق خطة مرحلية وتشكيل هيئة وطنية برئاسة رئيس الجمهورية، تضم بالإضافة إلى رئيس مجلس النواب ورئيس مجلس الوزراء شخصيات سياسية وفكرية واجتماعية. مهمة الهيئة دراسة واقتراح الطرق الكفيلة بإلغاء الطائفية وتقديمها إلى مجلسي النواب والوزراء ومتابعة تنفيذ الخطة المرحلية.وفي المرحلة الانتقالية: أ- تمثل الطوائف بصورة عادلة في تشكيل الوزارة. ب- تلغى قاعدة التمثيل الطائفي ويعتمد الاختصاص والكفاءة في الوظائف العامة والقضاء والمؤسسات العسكرية والأمنية والمؤسسات العامة والمختلطة وفقاً لمقتضيات الوفاق الوطني باستثناء وظائف الفئة الأولى فيها وفي ما يعادل الفئة الأولى فيها وتكون هذه الوظائف مناصفة بين المسيحيين والمسلمين دون تخصيص أية وظيفة لأية طائفة مع التقيد بمبدأي الاختصاص والكفاءة.

*
- المادة 62 (المعدلة بالقانون الدستوري الصادر في 21/9/1990)

في حال خلو سدة الرئاسة لأي علة كانت تناط صلاحيات رئيس الجمهورية وكالة بمجلس الوزراء.

In English:

^
Article 95 [National Committee](1) The first Chamber or Deputies which is elected on the basis of equality between Muslims and Christians takes the appropriate measures to realize the abolition of political confessionalism according to a transitional plan. A National Committee is to be formed, headed by the President of the Republic, including, in addition to the President of the Chamber of Deputies and the Prime Minister, leading political, intellectual, and social figures.(2) The tasks of this Committee are to study and propose the means to ensure the abolition of confessionalism, propose them to the Chamber of Deputies and the Ministers, and supervise the execution of the transitional plan.(3) During the transitional phase:

a. The confessional groups are to be represented in a just and equitable fashion in the formation of the Cabinet.

b. The principle of confessional representation in public servicejobs, in the judiciary, in the military and security institutions, and in public and mixed agencies are to be cancelled in accordance with the requirements of national reconciliation; they shall be replaced by the principle of expertise and competence. However, Grade One posts and their equivalents are exempt from this rule, and the posts must be distributed equally between Christians and Muslims without reserving any particular job for any confessional group but rather applying the principles of expertise and competence

Article 62 [Vacancy]Should the Presidency become vacant for any reason whatsoever, the Council of Ministers exercises the powers of the President by delegation.

Possible Effects of Hizbulla's Maneuverings on the Sunni-Shia divide in Lebanon

2007-04-19T03:02:00.000-07:00

Sound analysis of the Lebanese crisis over the course of the past couple of years -in the aftermath of Hariri's assassination and especially after the war last July -necessarily leads to the conclusion that the schism between the two sides of the Lebanese political spectrum can only widen. More dangerously, the effects of that schism can take on an increasingly sectarian image pitting Sunni against Shia.

A quick glance at what the future holds in store in the Lebanese political and legal arena shows two main events looming on the horizon - the presidential elections and the establishment of the international tribunal. In both cases Hizbulla and its allies, Nabih Berri and Michel Aoun are swimming upstream. There is not much they can do to stop the tribunal and even less to elect a president of their choice, both apparently objectives of the aptly named opposotion. To be precise, the only game they can play is one of hampering, obstruction and general bullying, which is exactly what they have been doing and will continue to do. The reason behind Hizbulla choosing to fight a losing battle is simple: the stakes are simply too high and eventhough the deck is stacked against them, Hizbulla have no choice (short of changing their very identity, ideology and MO) but to continue in their desperate tactics aimed at preventing the game from changing. But they have already lost that battle.

Naturally, with the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, there was no turning back the clock. But Hizbulla and its allies have not come to terms with that yet. In fact, they have tried various tactics to fill the vacuum that the Syrian overlords had left in their wake, the most obvious of which were bullying - political terror, so to speak - and instigating a war.

Recently, one can argue that more signs of hardening have started to emerge in their rhetoric and politics, whether by refusing to comment on the tribunal or by refusing the Arab proposed peace deal - even as Bashar is desperately trying to get Israel to engage him.

In any case, time moves forward and the direct Syrian era is fading into the background, but Hizbulla is becoming evermore associated in the eyes of many Lebanese with the opressors of a bygone era. With its goals of protecting Syria and imposing the will of the few, Hizbulla is playing a dangerous game. The Syrians were a foreign opressor, regardless of how "brotherly" our relationship with them should be. But Hizbulla is Lebanese, regardless of the foreign masters it serves. Its popular base is distinctly Lebanese, Shia to be specific. And as the stances of Hizbulla - from the rejection of a tribunal designed to investigate and try suspects in the brutal killing of a Sunni leader, to the rejection of a (Sunni) Arab launched peace initiative, to numerous other acts - start looking more and more like overtly sectarian behaviour shamelessly protecting murderous regimes at the expense of the interests of other communities in Lebanon (and of Lebanon as a state) - Hizbulla is putting its willing Shia base in an increasingly precarious situation, as the Sunni leadership in March 14 is becoming more and more comfortable with its Sunni identity, that can be a dangerous game to play...

You gotta love this!

2007-04-12T14:44:00.000-07:00

Quoting Haaretz on Syrian-American nogotiator, Ibrahim Suleiman's "trip" to Israel

The peace plan drafted during the unofficial Syrian-Israeli negotiations would allow Syria to cut itself off from the Hezbollah and join the global struggle against terror, Suleiman told the committee on Thursday.

Suleiman appeared before the committee alongside Alon Liel, former director general of the Foreign Ministry. The two briefed the committee members on the secret, unofficial talks they conducted, and on the understandings they reached for a peace agreement between Israel and Syria.

The centerpiece of the "non-paper" they drafted is a proposal to turn part of the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War and annexed in 1981, into a "peace park." Syria would be the sovereign in all of the Golan, but Israelis could visit the park freely, without visas.

In addition, territory on both sides of the border would be demilitarized along a 4:1 ratio in Israel's favor.

I guess desparation is running high, neck and neck with hypocricy. I have to admit though, I love the spunk...

On Inevitability

2007-04-09T02:01:00.000-07:00

The March 14 leadership in Lebanon is acting as if on the knowledge of something momentous happening that will alter the balance of power in the region. Barring anoutcome that is becoming increasingly likely such as a disastrous confrontation in Lebanon itself - perhaps in the shape of civil war - that leaves two possibilities: the international tribunal and the bombing of Iran. Much has been said about the tribunal and much remains to be said, especially about its consequences. But that leaves the second possibility - an attack on Iran, the topic of this post.

You see, certain "occurrences", merely by occurring, initiate a sequence of events that is unstoppable and to consequences that are inevitable. Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuweit was one such action. It set the stage for his demise years and years before the demise itself. But it made it inevitable... And there is an eerie resemblence between the events unfolding around Iran now and those involving Iraq following Saddam's defeat in the gulf war. Worldwide passive agressive shunning, followed by sanctions under the meek objections and mitigations of China and Russia, the list goes on... The Iranians did not invade a neighboring country; it remains true however that the world cannot afford to see them have the bomb - the Iranians simply do not play by the rules - and at one point or another they are going to suffer the consequences of their brashness, despite the meek Chinese or Russian objections. They objected plenty before Iraq was invaded, but did nothing to stop it. They may object to Iran being bombed but they won't stop it...

Arguably, Iran has not reached the point of no return yet, but it will if it stays the stubborn course and continues to play dumbball. In that case, the question becomes not whether it will be bombed, but rather when, and what will the consequences be... For Lebanon, those question carry special importance. What inevitable sequence of events will that launch? Can we survive the blowback?

Jumblatt Lashes Out

2007-04-04T17:18:00.000-07:00

March 14 "hardliner" Walid Jumblatt lashed out at the March 14 MPs who shook hands and exhanged pleasentries with the opposition MPs Tuesday at (the blocked) Parliament's gates Annahar reports.

"كنا في غنى عن هذه الحفلة من المصافحات الرنانة على طريقة القبضايات وعملاء
النظام السوري وأتباع الجمهورية الإسلامية بناة دولة "حزب الله" في مواجهة دولة
الطائف. كنا في غنى عن تناول القبلات التافهة مع الذين نتهمهم بالشراكة المعنوية
وربما التقنية في سلسلة الجرائم التي حصدت خيرة الساسة والمثقفين والإعلاميين
والابرياء، مع أولئك الذين يعطلون مسار المحكمة والعدالة. كنا في غنى عن هذه
الملاقاة الحارة مع الذين دمروا الاقتصاد وحولوا ساحات بيروت معسكرات وهربوا من
اجتماعات الحوار الى الحروب الاستباقية وعطلوا الدستور والمؤسسات في انتظار مغامرات
إضافية.
كنا في غنى عن هذه الابتسامات العريضة مع من يمثلون ثقافة الموت ونحن
الذين قلنا لجمهورنا إننا نمثل ثقافة الحياة.
بئس هذه الايام التي ينسى البعض
منا فيها من يمثل، على افتراض أنه يعرف من يمثل، وينسى أن الخصم بدهائه وخبثه
وتقيته يمثل الشرق وحكامه في غالبيتهم على الاقل وظلام الشرق وما يرمز اليه في بعض
من جوانبه من حقد وكره واستبداد وسواد".

March 14 fights back... in a way

2007-04-03T17:04:00.000-07:00

According to Annahar, 70 Majority (i.e M14) MP's submitted a petition regarding the International Tribunal to the UN Secretary General after Berri thrice refused to let them convene parliament. The petition requested that the secretary general take all the necessary measures to create an international tribunal for trying the suspects in the Hariri assassination.

Arguably, this takes matters one step closer to a chapter 7 resolution and simultaneously sidesteps convening parliament via deputy speaker Makari. While some may view this as fighting back, I am still wondering why March 14 preferred this option to the option of convening parliament which is a stronger statement in terms of affirming their commitment to the "formal" democratic institution of parliament... In any case its done now, and we have yet to see March 8's (and their patrons') reaction.

Now what ?

2007-04-01T15:20:00.000-07:00

It is getting beyond ridiculous... If Lebanese bloggers the world could see all of the crap going on in Lebanon coming from as far back 2 years ago, and advocated a "seize the day" approach - lest we get to where we are now - why couldn't March 14's leadership.
Alas, historical opportunities were missed not once, or twice but at least three times over... Its nothing short of amazing. Gambling on the wrong horse once or twice could be a mixture of stupidity and lack of luck, but gambling on the losing horse every single time requires a certain kind of incompetence only Lebanese leaders possess. Lucky us...
So, in short, events now are just consequences of M14's failure to act, a consequence of the deal they struck with HA and Amal during elections, of the patriarch's inability to see beyond the position of the presidency (whatever the hell that means) and of Saad's political inexperience and servitude to Saudi, of their constant courting of Nabih Berri and failure to see him for what he really is. What we are seeing now is nothing short of the natural progression of events. You see, March 14 gave up the ball, lost the initiative, and allowed Syria and Iran's counter-revolutionaries to regroup, re-organize, steal the initiative and force at least a stalemate.
March 14 cannot give the opposition a third plus one of the positions in government, for that is "political suicide". Right. But why would March 8 accept anything less ? They have managed to stall government, which is useless without parliament - incidentally also stalled, not to mention the presidency which has been a lost cause for a while now.
Where can March 14 go from here? That is the main question. HOw can they regain the initiative? Many of us had an answer two years ago - it was called march to Baabda, resuggested a year ago, even possibly viable a few months ago, but I doubt that any feasible answer exists today. Until something changes - drastically - or until March 14 forces a change... But that goes counter to their very fabric.

March 14... Again

2007-03-13T12:48:00.000-07:00

As events race and nothing changes, its the anniversary of broken dreams and misplaced hopes again. But then again we knew that two years ago.

Happy March 14.

Brace yourselves... Its gonna be a long long long ride

2007-02-21T01:29:00.000-08:00

I have been relatively quiet throughout the events unfolding in Lebanon and the region in early 2007... mostly because there is nothing much to say in the way of analysis.

While there have been many developments, from Hezbollah's riots on a certain Tuesday that now seems so long ago, to the blow-back across universities two days later... all the way to the Ayn Aar bus bombings -shocking the country and yet shocking no one- and then the large, yet inane regurgitation plagued gathering on the anniversary of Hariri's assassination.

In the meantime, rumors of breakthroughs in "indirect" talks conducted through Iran and Saudi Arabia (woopdidoo) were circulating and proving to be vacuous. No compromises have yet materialized and I doubt any to materialize in the near future... I don't even know if I want to be wrong or not anymore - what difference does it make?

After all this is no longer primarily about Lebanon or its internal politics, March 8 succeeded at internationalizing Lebanese politics, and consequently our problems are becoming even less about Lebanon by the day. Amidst Saudi-Iranian talks and the Syro-Iranian coordination, as well as all that recent Iranian belligerency and their never-ending war games and display of divine weapons (probably imported from either russia or china and upgraded in Iran) countered by the leakage (or announcement, I forget) of American (contingency) plans to bomb the living crap out of all Iran's nuclear and military facilities... amidst all that, Lebanon's factions are becoming just cards to be played out in a much bigger regional game.

Bottom line, as Syria and Iran play for time waiting for a Godot that even they might not recognize, Lebanon simmers and starts showing signs of boiling. In the meantime the economy is tanking, state instutions are shackled and we are left at the mercy of... well I am not sure whose mercy we are at.

I am just asking myself what should we expect the near future to bring, knowing and fearing that its going to be more of the same - at best.

Breaking News: Explosion in the North Metn region, casualties reported

2007-02-12T23:55:00.000-08:00

Naharnet reports:

At least three people were killed and seven others wounded when a bomb ripped through two mini-buses Tuesday in Ein Alak in the northern Metn province, Lebanese Red Cross officials said.
LRC Operations’ officer George Kittani told LBC television that evacuation was still underway.

Footage from the ANB news channel showed one of the buses torn apart, while the other heavily damaged.

Meanwhile Aljazeera reports 9 dead , quoting a Lebanese security source, in two explosions on buses the Bekfayya road:

مصدر أمني لبناني: 9 قتلى في انفجارين بحافلتين في طريق بكفيا بجبل لبنان

Brief Analysis: It seems that this blatant attack on innocent civilians aims at spreading fear one day before a March 14 planned demonstration, expected to mobilize hundreds of thousands to commemorate the 2 year anniversary of Hariri's assassination. The fact that the explosions targeted buses seems to at least point in the direction of perpetrators who want to deter people from attending... Terror at its worst...

Update: Al-Arabiya quoting the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation reported 9 dead as well, noting that Bekfayya is Jmayyel's hometown.

اعلن تلفزيون المؤسسة اللبنانية للارسال (ال بي سي) مقتل تسعة اشخاص الثلاثاء 13-2-2007 في انفجار لم تحدد طبيعته استهدف حافلتين قرب بلدة بكفيا الجبلية المسيحية في منطقة المتن الشمالي شمال بيروت.

وقال متحدث باسم الجيش ان أحد الانفجارين أصاب حافلة تقل ركابا قرب البلدة وتسبب في سقوط ضحايا. وأضاف أنه بدا من المعلومات الاولية أن الانفجار الثاني أصاب حافلة أخرى في نفس المنطقة.

ولم يتضح على الفور ما الذي سبب الانفجارين اللذين وقعا قبل يوم واحد من الذكرى السنوية الثانية لاغتيال رئيس الوزراء اللبناني الاسبق رفيق الحريري.

وبلدة بكفيا هي مسقط رأس الرئيس الاسبق أمين الجميل الذي اغتيل ابنه بيير في نوفمبر تشرين الثاني الماضي.

Update 2: It appears there is some confusion with regards to the fatalities, with some sources reporting 3 dead and others 12. It appears the bombs ripped through the buses 7 minutes apart with the first one causing most, if not all of the casualties.

"Us and Them" - Bill Hoopes

2007-02-09T10:48:00.000-08:00

Hizbulla Arms Truck Intercepted and Seized

2007-02-08T11:21:00.000-08:00

Naharnet reported that Lebanese authorities seized a truck which Hizbulla later blatently admitted was carrying munitions for the "resistance". They even asked for the return of the truck - after all Siniora's government did "admit" a long time ago that HA was a resistance. Oh ya, Siniora did make that admission after the HA and amal ministers boycotted government the first time, before the July war when Hizbulla started actively resisting the forward flow of time...
In any case according to sources quoted in the Naharnet story, there were guns, munitions and clips in the truck, which is quite worrisome on so many levels. First of all, there is no guarantee whatsoever that the truck was actually a HA truck. It could have belonged to any of Syria's cronies. Second, the fact that the Lebanese authorities managed to intercept one truck, seems to indicate to me that there possibly dozens of such trucks - given their efficiency and competence that is. I could go on and on about why this whole incident is worrisome, and I might do that - later.

Somethin's cookin

2007-02-01T00:54:00.000-08:00

Seems like somethin's cookin... the rags have tuned it down a bit and the politicians have been tradin not so negative signals...

A Lebanese Newspaper's Interpretation of the Jan 23 Riots

2007-01-23T16:58:00.000-08:00

Read em and weep:

Some translated sentences from Annahar (Wednesday's edition) front page
- Security forces, especially the army, passes the test of preserving peace in a complicated multi-faceted security situation.
- The government supporters tested their resolve in the face of opposition pressure and challenged the latter's disruption of public life.
- The opposition tested their ability to make the strike... a success.

In other words ladies and gentlemen, in Lebanon, everybody is a winner. And maybe, just maybe, that was the whole idea behind this last opposition move.

Lebanese Streets Burn...

2007-01-23T01:56:00.001-08:00

They burn so that a megalomaniac leader of a foreign funded militia can try to improve his own and his masters' local and regional bargaining chips... after all everything pales when compared to divine causes... Simultaneously, another megalomaniac leader longs for the presidential palace in Baabda and urges his supporters onwards... to chaos... to destruction... anything for that palace in Baabda... Meanwhile, the army and security services watch "helplessly"...

I don't have much more to say. Just that these are desperation tactics and should be recognized as such and dealt with accordingly by March 14. Oh, and that I expect more escalation in the coming days, weeks and months.

For older analyses of the situation, and why none of these events are surprising, and why the future is easily predictable please see here, here, and especially here.

For the latest coverage and pictures please see here, here, here as well as here

Give Them Enough Rope and They Will Hang Themselves An Analysis of The March 14 Coalition Strategy Against the Hizbulla Led Opposition

2007-01-12T11:16:00.000-08:00

It has been over a month since the Hizbulla led, Syro-Iranian backed opposition launched its campaign to topple the March 14 government which ironically they were part of. The campaign started with all the "opposition" ministers resigning and escalated with demonstrations in December and sit-ins in downtown Beirut demanding the resignation of Siniora's government. The opposition apparently tried to up the ante recently with the "Labor Union" staging demonstrations in front of various ministries objecting agains the government's reform plans and covertly the Paris III donor conference. Moreover, the speaker of parliament, Nabih Berri has refused to convene parliament effectively crippling the March 14 parliamentary majority...

In the face of pressure, the March 14 coalition simply held their ground. They staged counter demonstrations in many different Lebanese locales aimed at showing the popular support that the coalition enjoyed, called for the resigned ministers to rejoin the government and petitioned continuously for parliament to convene. The strategy seems to be simply to give the opposition enough rope to hang themselves. In other words, the government is simply letting the opposition make mistakes and escalate and burn bridges all the while somehow weakening them. What I continue to believe are half-measures and lack of initiative on March 14's side, seem to be "working" anyway. It appears that the opposition is running out of steam and/or struggling with internal squabbling resulting from the different intensity of political escalation which its various components (namely Hizbulla and Aoun's FPM) can withstand to achieve their various objectives and not lose popular support. The opposition continuously burned bridges over the past month and has not really offered anything in the way of an agenda except for toppling the government. As that goal seems further out of reach, I believe that they are now rethinking their strategy, counting to ten before taking further action.

Thus, the March 14ers seem to have the opposition caught in a deadlock or a stalemate which can only be broken through dialogue (either internally or with/amongst the foreign supporters of both camps). Assuming that the government manages to get the opposition to call off its campaign against Siniora, and to re-accept dialogue, it would achieve an important moral victory but nothing more.

The main issues that March 14 and March 8 disagree upon will not have been solved, the March 14ers will not have regained initiative and the March 8ers will still be able to play the impeding role that they have played since the inception of this government, serving Hizbulla's internal agendas as well as those of Iran and Syria. Upon closer inspection, I don't see that the eventual resolution of this particular conflict in favor of March 14 as useful in the resolution of the bigger conflict defined by establishing a certain high degree of Lebanese decision making capability, independent of (and sometimes against) Syrian and Iranian interest. One can even argue that March 14 is inherently incapable of such a challenge, but I won't get into that now.

Meanwhile, the political battle rages on, even though March 8 may have fumbled the ball on this one.

Hizbulla clashes with UNIFIL in South Lebanon?

2007-01-08T16:46:00.000-08:00

Annahar reported the following in its Tuesday edition:

اشتباك في الخرايب بين قوة فرنسية و"حزب الله"

الجنوب – "النهار":

أفادت مصادر مطلعة ان قوة من الكتيبة الفرنسية اشتبكت ليل السبت الماضي مع عناصر من "حزب الله" في خراج الخرايب – المجادل، وحصل اطلاق نار استدعى تدخل الجيش اللبناني اثر تفتيش القوة الفرنسية خراج هذه المنطقة وأماكن استخدمها "حزب الله" نقاطا أمنية ومنها المغاور، بحثا عن أسلحة.

Translation:

Informed sources reported that a force from the French Battalion (UNIFIL) clashed on Saturday night with members of Hizbulla on the outskirts of the village of AlKhrayeb-AlMjadel. An exchange of fire took place which called for the interference of the Lebanese army after the French unit searched this area and others that Hizbulla used as security points (?) including caves, in search of weapons.

Update
Almustaqbal reported Wednesday that UNIFIL and Lebanese security sources denied that there were any clashes with Hizbulla...

A Perfect Day in Lebanon

2007-01-07T22:54:00.000-08:00

Found this on youtube. I thought it was pretty funny.

European Union Vs Lebanese Division

2007-01-02T21:44:00.000-08:00

As 2007 witnesses the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the EU, bringing the total number of member states to 27 and the population of the Union to nearly half a billion people speaking 23 languages and sharing over 4 million square kilometers, I can't help but wonder.

I can't help but wonder when the ridiculously small population of Lebanon that has shared an even more ridiculously small piece of land for hundreds of years will even remotely resemble the European Union... Sigh.

Saddam Executed

2006-12-31T04:22:00.000-08:00

Well it happened. The end of a tyrant. An Arab tyrant for that matter. Only one of many. In a sense it might bring closure to the many people in the middle east whose lives Saddam destroyed one way or another. He has now paid with his life.

While I think that the man is one of the worst dictators - and there have been some pretty bad ones - that have ruled in the Arab world, he has long been out of the equation. From the day that the first American bomb fell on Baghdad, it's been curtains for him. The fact that it had to end in his execution seems natural in a place like Iraq, albeit - in my opinion - wrong on so many levels. Here are some reasons why.

1) He was tried and convicted for only one of sooo many crimes he has committed or authorized, and should have been tried for every one of his heinous acts.

2a) While the trial of Saddam was conducted by Iraqis and his execution performed by Iraqis, the fact that American army boots are still on the ground in Iraq does not give the proper feel of a sovereign action.
2b) It reeks of fear. It was a quick trial for one of many crimes with a speedy execution.

3) I don't believe in execution for reasons that have no place in this post.

4) The official videos released (and aired) of his hanging and of the moments before are in such bad taste. We would have taken your word for it. A picture of him dead - still distasteful but slightly less so - would have sufficed.

5) The unofficial video shot on some guy's cellphone that apparently made its way to the Internet (and to CNN) shows his executioners taunting him and cheering for Moqtada al-Sadr and Mohammad Baqer al-Sader (Moqtada's father in law, whom Saddam had tortured and executed). Ridiculously unprofessional and unnecessary. Reinforces 2b.

6) The fact that he was taunted so badly and obviously by his Shiite executioners, supporters of Sadr, is not gonna look good. How did they get there? And wayyyyyy more importantly, how are the Sunnis going to react?

I detested the man, his actions, and their impact on the lives and deaths of countless millions, but any which way you look at the execution, it just reeeeeks.

For one Iraqi perspective, check this out.

The End of a Bad Dream and The Beginning of a Bad Reality

2006-12-27T09:30:00.000-08:00

I originally wrote this on August 11, 2006, I am posting it now untouched.

Too many days and too many lives lost after the beginning of the sad affair that we have all experienced one way or the other, the fighting is drawing to a close. For me and for countless others dispersed in countless cities all over the globe and more importantly in Lebanon, this signals the end of a bad dream, the end of a nightmare. We have witnessed systematic destruction, death, and the force of ruthless players who view us merely as pawns in a game much bigger than we are. Now, we are left to awaken only to find that in place of the bad dream, we are confronted with a bad reality.

We look at our Lebanon only to see all the lives lost and all the destruction we have been dealt. So we look beyond, and staring us in the face are monumental challenges. Challenges the likes of which the Lebanese have seen many times before. We have an economy that has been all but shattered, an environmental disaster on our coastline, and the threat of the spread of disease. We have at least tens of thousands of refugees with no homes to go back to, and whether we like it or not some threat of worsening sectarian strife. These are challenges that we have overcome before, and with some luck, hard work and international assistance, will overcome again.

But the biggest challenge of all, the challenge that Lebanon has failed to overcome time and time again is that of averting disaster. Our nation has failed to admit that we have an ailing socio-political system, and even when it has admitted that, it has failed to cure itself. Thus, on our shoulders lies a heavy burden, the burden of responsibility to ourselves and to our country. It is up to us to make sure that none of the conditions that set us on a collision course with each other are ever allowed to fester again. It is up to us to ensure that we will never again be tools used by others, be they "brotherly" neighbors, "friendly" countries, or flat out foes. It is up to us to alleviate the squalor, marginalization and poverty that allows fanatics and fundamentalists to fester in our midst. And it is up to us to realize that no one but us will do it.

There will be great difficulty as there as those amongst us that want us to fail. They will accuse us of breaking national unity and of serving foreign interests. They will do their best for us to fail, giving speeches about pride and honor, reneging on their promises and stalling for time. Meanwhile, they form or support militias, import weapons from foreign countries and devote themselves to the service of alien agendas. We are up against a battle for people's minds and loyalties, and the equation is simple. Formation of a modern state founded on the principles of rule of law, tolerance and diversity is victory. Anything short of that, and we are back to the Lebanon of the 1980s, if not now, then inevitably in the not so distant future.

The war was our bad dream, this is our bad reality, but the future is ours to shape!

Lebanon's Unanswered Questions

2006-12-25T03:14:00.000-08:00

As 2007 approaches, Lebanon faces an identity crisis that its 60 years of formal independence could not resolve. It also obviously faces many other crises, economic and political, and it is part of larger regional conflicts as well. However, all of the latter ones are simply manifestations of the Lebanese people's failure to define what - other than geography and an imposed border- unites them under a common flag.

Question of identity

The question of identity is a natural one for a country with 18 recognized sects, among which are 5 major ones who don't necessarily share the same version of history or the same outlook towards the future. The Maronite and Greek Orthodox Christians, Sunni and Shia Muslims and the Druze have shared this piece of land for the decades that Lebanon has been a country and the many centuries before that it was not. Over different periods, both before Lebanon was created and after, the various communities clashed and co-existed, allied themselves with various external powers and tried to dominate one another. All of them have failed to establish long lasting hegemony. However, their communal experiences and alliances have shaped their sectarian identities in different manners and in sometimes opposing ways.

Case in Point

The Sunnis have long considered themselves as mainstream Arabs and in fact- at one point- opposed the very creation of Lebanon in favour of unity with Syria and at times a greater Arab nation. On the other hand, the Maronites are a fiercely "nationalistic" bunch, in that many of them believe that they are non-Arab Christians (as opposed to many Orthodox Christians for example) allowing them to legitimize looking to the west for support... Similarly, the Druze have a strong tribal sentiment and share with the Maronites a strong geographic connection with the region (in that both Druze and Maronites are relatively localized in and around Lebanon). Moreover, several times in recent (and not so recent) history, the various sects have committed atrocities against one another in the name of honor, dignity and self preservation.

Strength in diversity? Not really !

The point here - and books can and have been written on the subject -is to highlight and remind that Lebanon is a House of Many Mansions. The founders of modern day Lebanon realized that and understood that there was a need to define what Lebanon was. Their first attempt at that was the unwritten National Pact, which basically identified what Lebanon was not but failed to give clear answers as to what it is, and moreover failed to define - in practice - the ideals that Lebanon would strive to live by. Consequently, less than 2 decades after its establishment, Lebanon faced its first major crisis in 1958 followed by many others in the coming years. Lebanon's troubles culminated in a civil war which started in 1975 and eventually ended with the signing of the Taif accord in 1989, namely calling for such things as secularization- albeit without specifying a time-frame... Post-Taif, Lebanon was dominated by a Syrian regime that stifled dialogue and prevented tackling the very questions that Lebanon to this day needs answered so that it may proceed as one country rather than an unwillingly bound cocktail of sects.

Is the past the future?

1943 came and went and so did 1958, 1975, 1989 and 2005. And now 2006 has come and will soon be gone. Over sixty years old now, Lebanon still faces an identity crisis. Seemingly trivial questions* and others that are not so trivial dealing with both identity and strategy continue to haunt the Lebanese and will do so, with disastrous consequences, until they face them once and for all.

*A very non-exclusive list of questions that 2007 will see the Lebanese fail miserably to answer is:

-Where do we stand on Arab issues (e.g. vis-a-vis various regimes), and to what extent are we willing to get involved (with their struggles against the west and oppression of their people)?

-Where do we stand on the Arab-Israeli conflict, and to what extent are we willing to get involved (armed struggle, political support, neutrality)?

-Are we a secular country?

-If so, why is civil marriage not allowed and why aren't we proceeding with secularization?

-If not, why aren't we a federation of sects rather than a centrally governed country ?

-Can we agree on answers to these questions and if not, can we agree on how to proceed from there?

...

SSNP Arrests and Confiscation of Weapons

2006-12-21T16:08:00.000-08:00

According to various news sources (e.g. reuters, naharnet and the bbc), Lebanese "police say they have arrested at least four people and seized a large amount of explosives from homes in Lebanon. Those detained were not named by police but security sources said they were members of a pro-Syrian Lebanese party, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party."

In short, illegal weapons and explosives were confiscated. There were also reports that a car that had been reported stolen by its SSNP owner was found painted with a different color and all its numbers changed. Interesting...

In response, the leader of the SSNP, Ali Kanso, warned the security forces not to "take their injustices too far" and threatened that the "patience of the Syrian nationalists has its limits" claiming that the weapons were for "resisting the Israeli enemy" and have been stored since the eighties, and accused the government of harassment. He also attempted diverting attention from the news by reminding people that an airplane from Israel had landed with 11 people on board and left with 9 on the day of Jemayyel's assassination.

Note: It turns out that the plane used Cypriot airspace and had the Portoguese foreign minister on board, and that the two people who remained were reporters. It was also confirmed by the ministry of interior that all of this had occurred under the auspices of the army aviation control.

In any case, for resistance purposes or not (I think not), the weapons should have been confiscated and the culprits arrested as they have been. Hopefully, for a change, they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and any such weapons caches belonging to any party be raided and their owners held accountable. It is high time that the law start being applied for a change. Of course, the recent actions of our speaker of Parliament do not bode well in that direction, but thats a different story.

Coup d'etat, Coup d'etat, Coup d'etat

2006-12-19T21:23:00.000-08:00

There is no other reasonable explanation. None. In the context of the opposition's behaviour, i.e. upping the ante in the face of the "Arab initiative" of Amr Mousa, demanding early elections under a new law (to be drafted by which government and parliament pray tell?)

Naturally, the opposition leaders are not stupid. They realize full well that what they are asking for cannot be granted by the March 14'ers and that is the reason why they are asking for it.

Something is cooking in Tehran, and it sure don't smell good.

In the context of the regional developments, tying in Lebanon with Palestine and Hamas's acceptance then refusal then acceptance then refusal... of a national unity government, followed by Abu Mazen's apparent intention to call for an early election and the infighting on the streets of Gaza that followed... In this context, added with Syria's apparent overtures towards Israel and Bashar's meeting with Putin and the Syro-Iranians apparently banking on the weakness of G.W.B domestically (i.e. in the States), it becomes apparent that the Syro-Iranians are negotiating, playing their own game of carrot and stick with the west. With GWB in particular. But they want a price.

In the subtle mix of chess and poker that the Syro-Iranians are playing with the West, it is not yet time for appeasement in Lebanon. For that would be a loss.

The name of the game: change the rules of the game

I have argued previously, and continue to argue that it is completely unacceptable to Syria and to Hizbulla and its allies that the March 14ers control government and parliament then elect a president and thus complete their revolution. Hence, the HISHee alliance cannot back down just yet. They need to change the rules of the game to something more favorable to them. One such way is a coup d'etat.

The March 14'ers better be ready for it, coz its coming.

Update (hat tip Abu Kais)
According to various news sources (e.g. reuters, naharnet and the bbc), Lebanese "police say they have arrested at least four people and seized a large amount of explosives from homes in Lebanon. Those detained were not named by police but security sources said they were members of a pro-Syrian Lebanese party, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party."

Now to all of you out there that are demonstrating against the government, thinking that this is nothing more than a democratic means of expression pleaaaaaase know full well that no matter how well meaning YOU might be, there are those among you that have different plans and that no matter how much you think that what you are doing is in the spirit of democracy, no democratic means can justify an undemocratic end.

Crosses, Crescents and the Curse of Lebanon

2006-12-17T21:37:00.000-08:00

This post does not discuss present day politics in Lebanon for their own sake. Rather, I just want to highlight the behaviour of the various churches in Lebanon be they Muslim or Christian, their absurdity and their negative effect on the progress of democracy. Of course now that I have stated my goal, it seems like too monumental a task for one post, so I will stick to the "highlighting" part and add some commentary.

First, the Patriarch, ever so wise and calculating and capable of transcending the moment to capture eternal truths and policies that stand the test of time. Right... Well, his holiness - the same holiness that rejected a move to Baabda to topple the president in order to protect the precious right of the maronites to the presidency, thus legitimizing the Sunni mufti's move to lead prayer in the Seraille - has declared that family values are geopardized in the protests that the opposition is holding. His argument is that the protests are "mixed", mixed gender of course. God forbid that those boys and girls trying to topple Siniora should choose to take a break and have sex in one of those conveniently sturdy tents. How absurd!!!

Next, the Sunni Mufti - the same Mufti who would not stop singing the praises of the Syrian regime when they were around in Lebanon - recently decided that since it was ok for the maronite clerics to protect the president, then it must be his natural right (if not duty) to protect the Sunni prime minister from being toppled by Shiites and Christians.

As for the Shiite clerics, where do I begin. This particular brand of beardies has decided that it is both its natural right and divinely assigned duty to bear arms outside the realm of the state and to launch cross border operations that rain death and destruction on the Shiites and the other wonderful sects of Lebanon - all to protect the honor of the umma. Sheeeeeeeesh.

Of course that is not to say that the clerics of all the sects of Lebanon are not equally bad, they are. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the people of Lebanon have the right to practice religion and to follow whichever ugly bearded funnily dressed anachronistic clown that they choose. What the clerics do not have the right to do however, is trample upon the political realm issuing "advice" here and there and protecting politicians when convenient.

I think we have a right to a country where the churches and the state are separated. Where if Siniora's government is going to stand, then let it stand - just as long as the Sunni preachers of Friday noon are not the ones who save it. If the president in Baabda is going to stay in office, let him stay in office - just as long as the Sunday morning sermon in Bkirki isn't what saves him. And last but not least, if the people of Lebanon decide to wage war on Israel or not wage war on Israel, then let them make their decision freely - as long as it is not influenced by clerics schooled in Qom and Najaf.

The proper avenue for political debate is the institutions of the state. Namely parliament. Vote whomever you want to office, then topple them if they usurp power and break the constitution. Do it using democratic means, the ballot boxes, or demonstrations if need be. But do not let the clergy make your decisions for you, and do not let them have an influence on political matters. They are divisive, destructive and believe unwaveringly in ideas that were put forth over a thousand of years ago.

Why its going to get worse before it gets better

2006-12-13T16:38:00.000-08:00

In no particular order, the top reasons why the situation in Lebanon is going to get worse before it gets better:

1 - Because Lahoud's term is not over till late 2007.
2 - Because Hizbulla has lost its resistance card and needs to redefine itself, and has so far failed.
3 - Because Brammertz's final report is not out yet and the tribunal has not been finalized and nobody has been charged.
4 - Because of reason 3, the Syrians are worried and will do their best to impede the government and hence (they believe) the tribunal.
5 - Because Hizbulla and its external allies need access to the government to impede both Unifil and the tribunal.
6 - Because March 14 has failed to be pro-active and has been on the defensive and reactive side ever since they won the parliamentary elections.
7 - Because the Arabs have started mediating and the mediators have immediately acknowledged (implicitly) Syria's role by visiting it.
8 - Because the Arabs have no interest in a prolonged standoff and may be willing to sell out on their March 14 allies to force an unfavorable deal.
9 - Because the nature of the sectarian beast in Lebanon has made the level with which the communities detest each other dangerously high, to the extent that any compromise is unacceptable to them.

Brave Iranian Students

2006-12-11T23:27:00.000-08:00

From the BBC,

Iranian students have disrupted a speech President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was giving at a university by lighting fireworks and burning his portrait...
According to Iran's students' news agency, ISNA, the president responded by saying: "Everyone should know that Ahmadinejad is prepared to be burned in the path of true freedom, independence and justice."

Well, the Iranian president (and his buddies on the other side of Iraq, and across the border from there) should know that the only path to true freedom, independence and justice, might require them all burning... politically if possible.

Israel and Iran: More than meets the eye

2006-12-06T13:16:00.000-08:00

From Haaretz's english online edition:

In spite of the belligerent declarations of Iran's leaders - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeated his mantra this week that he expects the Zionist entity to collapse in the near future - Iranian representatives are holding negotiations with Israeli representatives. These are not only indirect negotiations, but real meetings. These meetings have been going on for about two decades, and concern laborious international arbitration regarding the debts between the two nations.

There are three separate litigations, which are taking place simultaneously in several European countries, all of them pertaining to a complex legal and business entity called Trans-Asiatic Oil Limited, and relating to one of the biggest secrets between Israel and Iran: the past oil connections between the two countries. Three years ago one of the arbitrations ruled that Israeli fuel companies have to pay the Iranian National Oil Company tens of millions of dollars. All the parties made efforts to maintain the secrecy of the decision and every other detail connected to the subject.

Iraq Study Group Report on Syria

2006-12-06T09:56:00.001-08:00

"Although the U.S.-Syrian relationship is at a low point, both countries have important interests in the region that could be enhanced if they were able to establish some common ground on how to move forward. This approach worked effectively
in the early 1990s. In this context, Syria’s national interests in the Arab-Israeli dispute are important and can be brought into play...

RECOMMENDATION 13: There must be a renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace on all fronts: Lebanon and Syria, and
President Bush’s June 2002 commitment to a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine.

RECOMMENDATION 14: This effort should include—as soon as possible—the unconditional calling and holding of meetings, under the auspices of the United States or the Quartet (i.e., the United States, Russia, European Union, and the United Nations), between Israel and Lebanon and Syria on the one hand, and Israel and Palestinians (who acknowledge Israel’s right to exist) on the other. The purpose of these meetings would be to negotiate peace as was done at the Madrid Conference in 1991, and on two separate tracks—one Syrian/Lebanese, and the other Palestinian.

RECOMMENDATION 15: Concerning Syria, some elements of that negotiated peace should be:
• Syria’s full adherence to UN Security Council Resolution 1701 of August 2006, which provides the framework for Lebanon to regain sovereign control over its territory.
• Syria’s full cooperation with all investigations into political assassinations in Lebanon, especially those of Rafik Hariri and Pierre Gemayel.
• A verifiable cessation of Syrian aid to Hezbollah and the use of Syrian territory for transshipment of Iranian weapons and aid to Hezbollah. (This step would do much to solve Israel’s problem with Hezbollah.)
• Syria’s use of its influence with Hamas and Hezbollah for the release of the captured Israeli Defense Force soldiers.
• A verifiable cessation of Syrian efforts to undermine the democratically elected government of Lebanon.
• A verifiable cessation of arms shipments from or transiting through Syria for Hamas and other radical Palestinian groups.
• A Syrian commitment to help obtain from Hamas an acknowledgment of Israel’s right to exist.
• Greater Syrian efforts to seal its border with Iraq.

RECOMMENDATION 16: In exchange for these actions and
in the context of a full and secure peace agreement, the Israelis
should return the Golan Heights, with a U.S. security guarantee
for Israel that could include an international force on the
border, including U.S. troops if requested by both parties."

The faltering hopes for a Lebanese democracy

2006-12-04T11:53:00.000-08:00

It's starting to dawn on me that Lebanon is not ready for modern democracy. While some of us aspire to the establishment of a true democratic system in which everybody is equally represented, at least a third of the Lebanese people not only have no faith in such a democracy, but are seeking their turn to dominate everybody else. Judging from several comments by Hizballah supporters in the blogosphere, which by the way are not solitary opinions but are rather widely shared within the shiite masses, the current events are viewed as:
1- A historic moment at which shiites will finally break sunni domination.
2- An opportunity to avenge the many years of marginalizing the shiite community in the Lebanese social and political arena.

The point to make here is that while the remaining two major communities, namely the maronites and sunnis, have had the opportunity to dominate, oppress and fail, the shiite community hasn't had its turn to oppress other communities or to be oppressed by other shiites.

Hizballah has a lot at stake here and the shia feel empowered by them. The alliance with Syria is not merely one of a master-slave relationship. Syria is a supply route, a regional power, and shares Hizballah's aspirations to perpetuate the state of war with Israel. So blocking the Hariri tribunal is a small cost they're willing to pay (assuming they had no hand in the murder) to maintain their relationship with the Syrian regime. To do so, Hizballah needed to mobilize the shiite masses against any agenda that conflicts with theirs and the approach they've chosen for this mobilization is one of sedition.

The question now is what are the other communities to do in the face of this new shiite coup? Blood has already been spilled with the death of the Amal supporter. It won't be long before we hear voices within the shiite camp crying against "an apartheid against the shiites" and the need for shia members to take up their hidden arms to protect and preserve the community.

One answer would have been to promote the culture of life instead of death (sounds a bit cliche now), but I think we're way beyond that point. The Shia are angry and they want revenge by blood and power, not only for the slain demonstrator, but for the thousand shia that were killed during the summer war (while the sunni controlled Arab states rightfully criticized the 'dignified and just' Hizballah for triggering the war), and for the last 60 years of being the underpriviledged community in Lebanon.

It's time for Hizballah to be discredited. Nasrallah has so far delivered on his promises. By foiling this coup, a memorable promise would be broken. Whether it's through international and mainly arab pressure on Iran, I'm still not clear about the means to end this standoff, but March 14 cannot give in. If this coup fails, I don't see the shia getting as excited about another one as they are about this one.
After all, broken promises are never forgotten.

They are not playing with fire... they are the fire!!!

2006-12-03T14:21:00.000-08:00

According to naharnet, one person was killed (a shia) while others were wounded in clashes between sunnis and shias in a predominantly (poor)sunni area of beirut. The question that one must ask himself is why are the members of the opposition, namely HA so bent on playing with fire. They are fully aware that they are intimidating and antagonizing the Sunni areas of Beirut. They are fully aware that the Sunnis are extremely upset and feel like this is a Shia coup directed at them, otherwise why would the Sunni mufti lead prayer in the Seraille.

Also recently, a Syrian national was arrested (source needed) after he had cursed at Nasralla in front of the latter's supporters and then fled towards the predominantly Christian are of Ashrafieh... I wonder what that was about.

Its time to wake up and smell the coffee, and the stench of a coupe d'etat... Its time to see the Syrian plot for what it really is: a plan to spread chaos to lebanon. What better way to escape all the troubles that they are facing, than to plunge Lebanon, after Iraq into chaos... I don't know if they are calculting properly or not, because I am not sure about the reaction in Syria, but thats a different story.

For the time being it is time for this coup d'etat/counter-revolution masquerading as a demonstration to end, in any way possible, while a war is still avoidable. If it doesn't end soon, march to baabda. It just might be the best way to direct the tension and turn the tables.

March 14, shape up or shut up...

2006-12-01T11:44:00.000-08:00

Alright so Hizballa, Berri and Aoun have taken to the streets in huge numbers (regardless of the relative participation of each). They have shown what we already know, i.e. that they have the support of most of the Shia community and some of the Christian community.

I have previously argued, and continue to argue, that it is not politically intelligent for March 14 and government supporters to "stay home" as Jumblatt urged the March 14ers to do yesterday. A successful foreign initiative (doubtful) not withstanding, I have no doubt in my mind that the March 8 camp will continue to hold protests, camp out in downtown and escalate (as they themselves have promised numerous times) until Siniora's government falls.

You see, one has to be able to differentiate between the isolated demonstrations (even though they were huge) that March 14 organized after the Karami resignation and after each political assassination on one hand, and the sustained, continuous demonstrations, sit ins and political escalation that the aptly named current opposition (to everything not them) is planning and holding. March 14's post-Karami protests were just that, protests. This is sustained political pressure to achieve a well defined goal, and it is at its best.

At this rate, I don't think that Siniora's government will be able to hold for long if HA is to continue escalating. They look weak, and they look dependent on foreign support, and that is a recipe for failure. But the appearances are false. The Siniora government has the support of most of the Sunni and Druze communities and a lot of the Christians, it has the support of most of the upper middle class and of many of the seculars and academics, and it should show that to the world, and more importantly to the Lebanese. To the March 14 movement I say this:

If a million Lebanese people repeatedly took to the street to protest against the assassination of a person, why can't the same million people and more take to the streets to protest the assassination of hope, the prospect of democracy, and the dream of a stable prosperous future. The assassinated politicians were killed because, to their supporters, they were the symbols of that hope, now hope itself is being targetted. Is that not reason enough to mobilize? Have no doubt, this battle is for the future of Lebanon, and not taking action today will affect our tomorrow.

I still believe that if the opposition plan is to topple Siniora, then the best defence of the March 14 government is an offensive against the president. Bear in mind that if Siniora's government falls, then the country is indefinitely in the hands of the opposition, which also owns the positions of presidency and speaker of parliament, and thus practically no longer an opposition but a ruling party. Again that is simply unacceptable. If there is going to be a vacuum in the executive branch, then it should go all the way up. Prime minister for president, the simplest of equations. Then everything is in parliament's hands...

Restated briefly, there will be no civil war if March 14 takes to Baabda. The opposition is enforcing an equation: "Its my way or not at all". In response,
I think its time for March 14 to shape up and take action or shut up and abandon their cause, for good. The idea of a "Beirut Spring", a la Samir Kassir, is what gave me hope for the future, and I interpreted the independence uprising of March 14 partly as an embodiment of that hope. The so called opposition wants to hijack our future and align us with an axis of perpetual struggle. I prefer my struggles to be for a prosperous future, not ones initiated and sustained indefinitely by ideologues, demagogues, mullahs and dictators. If a peaceful future is the future that March 14 wants, then it is time to act. If the dystopia of "1984" is acceptable to them, then so be it, keep talking and don't take action. Either way, let us know, so we can abandon hope.

The cards have been dealt... Time for the showdown

2006-11-29T18:45:00.000-08:00

In keeping with my tradition of diverging from the title of the post, I can't help but notice a convergence of the omens of doom, single file, in military formation under the leadership of the bearded one awaiting what has been dubbed the "zero hour"... On to the omens.

It seems that the flu of divine ligitimacy has spread to his holiness, general Aoun, who said (assafir) that they had reached the "stage of holy anger" (مرحلة الغضب المقدس) and added that "there will be no bloodletting, those who want to kill us can kill us, martyrdom is not only for Muslims" (wow and the guy is "secular"...), declaring that "our option is merge with our environment" (Syria? Iran? Political retro-Islam?) "because it protects everyone..."... Give me a break herr general...

Meanwhile, the other general, the one who sits at the helm of this wretched country of ours justified civil disobedience by government employees, citing disobedience in India at the time of Ghandi (So who exactly is Ghandi here? and who is the foreign oocupation? and since when has our beloved general turned president been a spiritual-intellectual figure?... Give me a break herr general...

About the same time, more signs whats to come "emanated" from Berri, who has shown his true colors and mettle yet another time, by declaring that there is no way now "to avoid the street even if its unwanted" (Really? Last I heard, free will was key, but then again that presupposes that you have it, and that you really don't want to hit the streets. I think both presuppositions are wrong...)

At this time, my only hope is in one of the institutions that I have a strong dislike for, the army. It is up to them to hold the peace, prevent rioting, clashes, and protect the government. What doesn't go for Lahoud, can't go for Siniora. Plain and simple. In the meantime, March 14 should finally grow a pair other than Jumblatt's and act rather than keep reacting, usually to murder, and by mass demonstrations whose numbers keep dwindling and by international whining. Enough!!!

The lines are drawn, and its obvious who is about to cross them. I suggest that March 14 pre-empt any "opposition" moves and mobilize its own public to camp in downtown, in defence of the Siniora government. The Siniora government should prove that it is worth defending, by appointing new ministers to replace the resigned 6 and murdered 1 and then wait for the general in baabda to sign, which he won't. At that point, it would be time to march to baabda... Take the initiative goddamnit...

Brinkmanship: you blink you lose...

2006-11-24T11:10:00.000-08:00

A recent post, "To hell in a handbasket..." by Raja from lebanesebloggers, macabrely argues that the scenario by which Syria strikes a deal with the west and many prominent heads from the March 14 movement roll, may be the best for Lebanon's future. Such a conclusion pre-assumes that the alternative is nothing short of "tectonic plates colliding", i.e. civil war.

That in turn assumes that the parties involved, or some parties involved, are willing to take the country down that road. Ok, so lets look at who the parties involved are, and why none of them stand to gain from a civil war in Lebanon. If one agrees with the analysis that noone will take the last step towards such a bloodbath then you will also agree that the party that blinks first in this standoff, loses. But I am jumping the gun, so lets see why no-one wants a war:

Internal Forces

March 14 Unarmed, recently succesful at kicking the Syrian army out, looking forward to a stable country that they can rule, massively outgunned and outtrained by HA, has nothing to gain and everything to lose from a war.

Hizb Despite having a militia and hence the capability to wage war on the internal front, such a tactic would detract from their image in the arab world as freedom fighters and all that jazz and put them on the Shia side of a Sunni-Shia civil war. Moreover, this will take away precious resources that they would prefer to allocate to their "struggle" with their sworn enemy. It would embarass their lifelines in Iran and especially Syria and as I mentioned, isolate them in the arab world... On the other hand their "totalitarian" style ideology which seems incapable of adapting to or accepting the confessioanal nature of Lebanon, has put them in a situation where they cannot strategically gain without breaking March 14 completely. The question is how far can they go, and how clearly are they thinking...

Michel Aoun Ever the presidential wannabe, his entire polity is directed and governed by that dream. I do not see him gaining anything from a civil war.

Syria's Cronies It is completely pointless to analyze them individually, as they will simply follow Syrian orders.

External Forces

The US I cannot think of a reason whereby they would want to destabilize Lebanon, thereby increasing the chaos in the region especially with their pridicament in Iraq. Add to that I don't think they would want their ally Israel to have to deal with a volatile Lebanon where their northern border would be "uncontrolled"...

France The Chirac administration has proved to be an invaluable ally to the March 14 movement and whoever wins the election might be less enthusiastic towards supporting Lebanon, but in any case the fact that they have troops in teh South indicates that they would be genuinely interested in preserving a stable and safe environment there.

Syria Another Sunni-Shiite civil war on another of their borders, with them on the Shiite side and 70% of their population being Sunni, is nothing short of signing their own death sentence.
Moreover, in my opinion, their eggs are all in one basket. Killing the investigation and/or toppling the government and/or killing the March 14 leadership while trying to avoid a civil war that might be too much to handle and to check. In short desperate obstructionism... However the rationality of their decisions and the extent to which they are cornered might prove decisive in how crazy they might behave. Still history has shown them to be masters of brinkmanship without ever crossing the line. They realize that once the line is crossed, there is no turning back.

Iran The great unknown... also definitely the most influential player governing HA's decisions along with Syria. Notably however, they are the ideological parents of Hizb while Syria is onlt a strategic partner, a very crucial one though. That said, I wonder how connected are the timings of the G8 summit discussions on Iran and HA's cross border operation to capture the 2 israeli soldiers. Also, one has to wonder how cohesive the Iranian leadership is in its treatment of HA and how far they are willing to go in using HA as a pressure card against the west. Of course, I am sure they realize that by actually accepting a civil war in Lebanon, their card is burnt. So here again assuming a rational decision process implies that this player has stakes in avoiding the turmoils of internal war in Lebanon...

In Short

Under the very crucial assumption that all the internal and external players on the Lebanese arena are relatively rational and reasonable, the chances of any one of them pushing towards an escalation and a civil war is relatively small.

The only danger in my opinion is in the alliance of Syria, Iran and Hizbullah, not because they want a civil war but more because they might not see an alternative to it. In the case of the Syrian regime, desparation might (in the medium to long-range future) lead them to a point where they might decide to bring Lebanon down with them, or to think that a burning Lebanon might for some reason salvage their anomalous control of Syria. In the case of Hizbulla, the fact that they have been pushed away from the borders with Israel and are separated from their arch-enemies by thousands of international and Lebanese troops might challenge their very "raison d'etre". Moreover, the fact that they are armed to the teeth with nowhere to use these weapons and no enemy to channel them against might lead to them redefining the enemy internally. We are already seeing signs of that. Which brings me to Iran. They are the side I am worried about most, simply because they are in a situation they have never been before, and we have never seen them act under similar situations. What I am referring to is their new-found regional superpower status. With influences in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Bahrain, and perhaps even Kuwait, the Mullocracy has the power to both create and destroy which had been previously always checked by Saddam. To what extent are they willing to use Hizb in Lebanon, and would they push to a civil war? Their experience in Lebanese politics is more limited than other players and this lack of experience might cause decisions that are not hampered by previous pains...

Michel Sleiman's "Order of the Day"

2006-11-21T16:56:00.000-08:00

From Assafir
<أيها العسكريون، ثقوا بأن انتشاركم على امتداد الحدود اللبنانية، البرية والبحرية، إنما يسهم في اقفال الابواب أمام رياح الحروب التي عاناها اللبنانيون طويلا، ويشكل حافزا قويا لاستكمال تحرير ما تبقى من ارضنا المحتلة في مزارع شبعا وتلال كفرشوبا وبلدة الغجر، ويعكس تعزيزا للامن والاستقرار في الداخل، ويهيئ مساحة رحبة للتلاقي والحوار بين ابناء الوطن وتحصين وحدتهم الوطنية. وإذا تعذر على شعب يعاني الفتن ان يحرر ارضه ويحمي استقلاله، فمن المتعذر ايضا على اي شعب حدوده مستباحة وساحاته مفتوحة لمختلف الصراعات، ان ينعم بالسلام والطمأنينة والاستقرار>.
Translation:
"Soldiers, trust that your deployment along the Lebanese borders, land and sea, closes the doors against the winds of war that the Lebanese have suffered from for long, and forms a strong incentive for continuing the liberation of what remains of our occupied lands in Shebaa, Kfarshooba and Ghajar, and reflects a reinforcemnt of internal security and stability, and sets the stage for dialogue between our countrymen and reinforces their national unity. If it is not possible for a people that suffers from internal strife to liberate its land and protect its independence, then it is impossible also for a people whose borders are violated and its arenas open for various struggles to enjoy peace and stability."

In light of recent developments, I can't help but notice how much this sounds like nothing more than voices on the wind?

How many more to go? The Syrian Strategy in Lebanon

2006-11-21T13:06:00.000-08:00

Yet another minister and member of the March 14 group in Lebanon, Pierre Jemayel, has been assassinated. Lebanese bloggers have picked up on the story and there is an abundance of posts on the calamity (see for example Abu Kais's entry or Doha's entry...). In the meantime the cycle continues.

What I want to focus on -assuming the obvious, i.e., that perpetrators are agents working for the Syrian regime or for their stooges in Lebanon- is the strategy that Syria seems to employing in Lebanon. For those who have offhandedly previously dismissed the regime as merely bloody and stupid, I beg to differ. The claim that it is bloody is obviously true; on the other hand, they may deserve more credit for strategy and tactics. This should perhaps lead to the Lebanese anti-Syrians to rethink their own strategy...

In any case, I believe that the Syrians are playing a very cynical game in Lebanon and Iraq, whereby in their smaller neighbour they harvest a policy of assassinations to weaken their enemies. The idea is to decapitate, debilitate and demoralize their Lebanese foes. Simultaneously, this strategy delivers a message to the international community that they are willing - and able - to outlast the "internationals" in Lebanon. They will do whatever it takes, bloodletting included. All the while, they meddle in Iraq, exporting Jihadis to their already volatile larger neighbor in an attempt to destabilize it. The goal you might ask?

As long as the Americans are tangled up in Iraq, and as long as they can eventually understand that they will not accomplish anything in Iraq without the Syrians (and Iranians) cooperating, the Syrian regime can eventually extract a price from a future US administration for said cooperation. That price is domination of Lebanon and possibly less importantly retrieval of the Golan and peace with Israel. To achieve that goal, the regime reckons that all it needs to do is outlast the US (and French) administration in Lebanon by maintaining a healthy arsenal of allies while systematically picking off its foes. If they can bring the Americans to a breaking point in Iraq, whereby Syrian cooperation is a must, then they can force their hand in Lebanon, making the Hariri tribunal disappear. With only a bloodied anti-Syrian group with no international support in Lebanon to oppose them, they will be in prime position for re-establishing hegemony and perpetuating their regime.

Perhaps it is not that stupid after all ?

Lebanon's Demographics Revealed

2006-11-18T17:31:00.000-08:00

Last Monday, Annahar publishedan article reporting on a census conducted in Lebanon, revealing the changing demographics in a country, where the true numbers were previously held from the public. The census was conducted by a Yussef Shahid Aldweihy "يوسف شهيد الدويهي" by going through all the birth records (sijillat alnofous), leading to a clearer picture of how the Lebanese public is distributed according to age, religion, and geographical location. I personally can't wait to get my hands on Dweihy's complete results which are reported to contain 210 charts...
In the meantime, we have to settle for a summary of the results that annahar published.

Accordingly, Lebanon's population is 64.29% Muslim and 35.33% Christian.

Of the Christian population, the Maronites form the majority at 19.47% followed by the Orthodox Chrisitians at 6.85% and the Catholics at 4.55%, with Armenian Orthodox Christians at 2.27%.

On the other hand, among the Muslims, the Sunnis and Shias pretty much evenly split the pot at 29.6% and 29.5% respectively. In distant third are the Druze at %5.38, and then the Alawites with less than a percent.

The more telling statistic in Dweihy's report is that among those under the age of 20 , the Christians form only 23.31% compared to a whopping 76.59% for the Muslims.

Meanwhile, geographically, and using the traditional five Muhafazat, as opposed to the administrative eight currently used, Dweihy notes the following.
The Nabatieh and South Muhafaza contains 24.19% of all Lebanese, compared to Akkar and the North which contain 23.63%, and Mount Lebanon which contains 22.53%...

Which brings me back to an old point that I raised on this blog concerning sectarianism and minorities...

Samir Kassir's: "Being Arab". Will we get out of the "Malaise"?

2006-11-17T18:40:00.000-08:00

Recently, a friend of mine and I were discussing the sad state of affairs that the cultural world of the arabs finds itself in. We noted how a vibrant nahda period around the late 19th and early 20th century when arab writers, poets and artists were extremely productive has become - 100 years later - nothing more than a thing of the past. We tried to understand what brought that sorry state of affairs about, and I suggested that the rise of Arabia (as in the gulf), after the discovery of oil, allowed countries that had previously been on the fringes of culture (and more or less political influence) to exert much more influence on their more cultured neighbours.

More recently, I started reading Samir Kassir's "Being Arab" (published after his death) which in one of its chapters forwards a similar argument. He supplies various examples of how the mini-renaissance (he doesnt call it that) that was being experienced in various arab cities around and after the late 19th century, was eventually turned back due to the rising "cultural" influence of the arabs of Arabia proper.

In any case, the moral of the story (if there is one) is that the rising tide of political Islam (a product exported largely from the gulf) is a danger that threatens to nip the cultural development of the arabs. In fact, it has already done extensive damage to all forms of expression, be it cinema, literature, music (to a lesser extent), theatre... However, it is not too late to salvage the dying renaissance and to present it as an alternative to the fanaticism of politicized religion on one hand, and to complete subjugation to the West on the other. The idea is to promote the evolution of a modern cultural identity that is not un-necessarily confrontational and simultaneously a source of pride to people. What better than a flurry of writers, painters, poets, directors, artists, and sculptors producing high quality works that appeals to people, to rid us of the backwardness and despair that political-religion brings.
So... pull out a piece of paper and start writing, or a canvas and start painting. Its time to get to work!

Beware the Sectarian Divide: The Jumblatt - Hizbulla Split Manifests in Inter-Sect Relations

2006-11-09T19:12:00.000-08:00

According to Annahar, the new head of Druze religious establishment (the Sheikh El-Akel) was accepting congratulations on his new appointment.
Notably, representatives of the religious establishments of all the major sects -all but one that is- were present, and so were "rebel" Shiite clerics like the mufti of Tyre, Ali El-Amine. However, there was no one to be seen from the Shiite religious leadership (fadlallah, kabalan,...).
Such moves are inflammatory and even outright dangerous. It is completely acceptable and fully reasonable to expect that the political leadership of various Lebanese sects not see eye to eye, and even to completely disagree and as such be political opponents. On the other hand, it is completely not acceptable that such disagreements between the various "civilian" or "secular" sectarian leaders, reflect on the relationships between the political establishments. For that is when things can take a turn for the worse. The absence of the major Shiite clerics from such an event can only be seen as a slap in the face of the Druze establishment, which may cause a reciprocating slap in the face. This can easily get out of hand and with the political leaderships of these two sects at odds, no good can come out of the religious establishments boycotting each other. Beware...

Note: I am an ardent secularist, and believe in the separation of church (in all its forms) and state. Moreover, I believe in the separation of church and politics. On the other hand, I believe that Lebanon is far from this ideal and that the actions of the various churches have direct consequences on the polarization of the masses. As such, I am only warning against irresponsible behaviour on the part of the churches.

Irrelevant Update: "Suicided" Syrian minister Ghazi Kanaan (who was once in charge of the Lebanese file for a long period of time), apparently shares the bug with his brother Ali, who was recently found "suicided" as well - on railway tracks (Wow, how creative!). Give me a break.

The one statement that Saad Hariri said that matters

2006-11-05T18:58:00.001-08:00

From Almustaqbal :

وعن دخول النظام السوري على الملف السني اللبناني لاختراق الشارع قال: "ان شاء الله يتمّ اختراق الساحة السنية في سوريا، وليس في لبنان".

Rough Translation
...and on the Syrian regime trying to achieve a breakthrough into the Lebanese Sunni street, Saad said: "Hopefully the breakthrough will happen in the Syrian Sunni arena, not the Lebanese one"

Was he only referring to the fact that the Syrian regime has little support among the Syrian Sunnis, or to opponents of the Syrian regime being able to agitate the Sunnis there against the regime? I wonder... But at this point, it might be a good strategic option. The question remains, if thats the strategy, what are the right tactics to pursue?

Its on ! Is it on ?

2006-11-01T21:57:00.000-08:00

It looks like its on. The final showdown, or a big bluff by HA, who knows. But assuming that they are planning the final showdown, it has to end with the emasculation of either HA and allies or of March 14. It is becoming clear that the March 14 gang will indeed agree to go to the stupid "mushawarat", albeit with an ammended agenda. In other words, March 14 is saying "fine, you want to waste time lets do it". Aware of that, HA in the words of its lunatic in chief, has set a one week deadline on the dialogue (consultations to be precise), after which they threaten to resort to the streets and lay siege to ... all state institutions. As you may have guessed, a countermove was declared by the opposing camp, and by none other than the unconstitutional president's son in law. Elias Murr, the defence minister, has announced (Annahar, Thurs Nov. 2) that 20,000 armymen from the special forces (wow, i didnt know we had that many), would be deployed in Beirut where they would confront any attempt at riot. And protect people's constitutional right to demonstrate...

Simultaneously, the US is warning of an attempt by Syria, Iran, and HA to topple the government while the Syrian press is launching an attack against the March 14 leadership...

Tense times east of the Mediterranean, as it becomes more clear that the battle for Lebanon is on. Will there be a confrontation and who will win? If not who will fold first, and concede defeat? Of course, Lebanon being Lebanon, there is always the possibility that some stalemate "deal" will be cooked up, only to delay the inevitable...

French UNIFIL contingent to fire at IAF overflights?

2006-10-16T17:59:00.000-07:00

According to a report in Haaretz, Israeli defence minister Amir Peretz told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that "Commanders of the French contingent of the United Nations force in Lebanon have warned that they might have to open fire if Israel Air Force warplanes continue their overflights in Lebanon".

While such a threat is highly unlikely to have come from UNIFIL, and more unlikely to be fulfilled if it was ever made, it would be quite an interesting development if it were true. In fact, it would be quite useful for the Lebanese majority to quote as an argument against the bias that Hizbulla and allies claim that the UNIFIL inherently has towards Israel...

2006-10-16T01:00:00.000-07:00

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

-THe Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1

Sectarianism in Lebanon: A Threat to Minorities

2006-10-13T23:22:00.000-07:00

Contrary to what may appear as true at face value, the Lebanese sectarian system is a threat to the existance of the very minorities it aims to "protect". In fact, it is a threat that grows by the day and that must be dealt with as quickly as possible. Otherwise the consequences may be catastrophic to the "spirit" of Lebanon as a country of minorities.

Rough estimates of the sectarian makeup reported in some sources put Christians at about 35 to 40% of the population (see for example wikipedia's page on the demographics of Lebanon)with the Maronites being the biggest Christian sect followed by Greek Orthodox, among other sects like Catholic, Armenian Othodox and Armenian Catholic, and smaller groups like Syriac, Coptic... Similarly the Muslim sects forming a combined 60-65% of the population are divided mainly among Sunni, Shia, Druze, and Alawite. Among the Muslim sects, the Sunnis and Shias form the bulk of the population mass, with roughly equal numbers, possibly with the Shias having a few percent more... The Druze constitute a minority and the Alawites number even less...

It quickly becomes obvious from just looking at the range of sects and numbers in the preceding paragraph that the demographics in Lebanon are rather skewed to the Muslim side, namely towards the Shias and Sunnis. This observation becomes more more relevant when we note that in 1932 Christians constituted over 50% of the population (amazingly on the website of the Lebanese embassy to the US) and have been decreasing in proportion since then. The reasons for the demographic shift are many, but the main point is that it is happening and thus we must deal with it as a fact on the ground.

On the other hand, representation in Lebanon - including in parliament, in government and in particular with the posts of prime minister and president - is governed by a strict sectarian quota whereby the President has to be Maronite, Prime Minister has to be Sunni, the Speaker of the House (Parliament) has to be Shia. Moreover, parliament is also devided among the sects with Christians and Muslims getting 64 seats each for a total of 128. Even more specifically, Maronites get 34 seats, Sunnis get 27, Shias 27, Greek Orthodox 14, Catholics 8, Druze 8, Armenian Orthodox 5, Other Christian 3, and Alawite 2. Add to that, the sects vie for high level public sector jobs following a similar specific sectarian subdivision.

The reason that such a system is a danger to the minorities that it over-represents is exactly that. The mere fact that some sects are over-represented automatically implies that others are under-represented. A quick look at the numbers would immediately reveal that the under-represented sects are the Shias and the Sunnis, who have a combined 54/128= 42% of parliament while possibly constituting close to 60% of the population. Similarly, I suspect that Sunnis and Shias are under-represented in public sector positions and diplomatic positions if the sectarian guidelines are followed (eventhough the Maronite Patriarch was recently implicitly complaining that the opposite is true).

That said, it is also important to note the above observations in the context of the geo-political situation and changing social fabric of the sorrounding Middle East. More specifically, many Shias, disenfranchised with the system, have turned to the fundamentalist and militant Hezbollah which is mainly funded and sponsored by the regime in Iran. The Sunnis on the other hand were previously led largely by the late Rafic Hariri whos absence arguably makes the Sunni community much more permeable to influence from radical and fundamentalist groups.

So the main things to note here are that the Sunnis and Shias (most probably) together constitute a majority in Lebanon. Moreover, under the current system they are under-represented in parliament as well as (probably) public sector jobs. Add to that, the majority of the Shias currently follow a radical group sponsored by a regime like Iran, while the Sunnis with the death of Hariri are more open to influence from religious populist groups.

Reading the situation as it is laid out above, it becomes clear that the sectarian system as it currently stand is not sustainable. Under the weight of population growth, and hence increasing poverty and under-representation, the large Muslim sects could gradually become less and less tolerant of the status quo. Which is where things could get dangerous. If the other sects refuse to acknowledge those facts and decide to selfishly stick to the system as it currently is, the wrath of larger sects whos religious identity is open to growth might be hard to handle. Mix that with the tensions currently seen between the Sunnis and Shias and you are left with a complicated and volatile situation that nobody could predict or manipulate effectively as the last Lebanese civil war amply proves.

Which leads to a very simple conclusion. To protect the existance of minorities in Lebanon, and thus the religious diversity it exhibits, these minorities have to make concessions. In fact, one could argue that these "concessions" do not necessarily have to be painful ones. To the contrary, they could take a form whereby short-term losses would be more than compensated for by a system that leaves Lebanese sects satisfied in the long run. I argue that such a system necessarily has to be non-sectarian, preferably outrightly secular. Otherwise, over the years as the demographics of Lebanon continuously change and the sects compete for control and hegemony, breaking point after breaking point will be encountered and turmoil will be the order of the day for a long time to come. It is time that we take responsibility and develop a system that ensures a stable future guaranteeing the rights of all religious groups, while simultaneously being sufficiently secular to automatically compensate for demographic changes.

Information, Misinformation and the Hints of Impending Doom

2006-10-08T17:23:00.000-07:00

Browsing the wide array of Lebanese newspapers daily, I cannot help but notice the discrepancy in the reporting and editorials between the newspapers. A recent unfortunate shooting involving security forces and locals building illegal housing in the suburbs of Beirut left children dead, with claims that the security forces were the source of the lethal shots and conflicting claims that the bullets were of a type that the security forces did not use... Similarly, newspapers are increasingly becoming more polarized in their editorials, reflecting the tensions that seem to be so permeant in the country. Accusations of treason are being thrown around left, right and center, and the tensions are starting to find an outlet on the streets.
Mainly, it is the Sunni-Shia schism that is to be feared the most. The only warning that I have at this time is that if the choice is going to be made for that battle to be fought, then aside from Iraq, Lebanon is the next choice for battleground. Saad Hariri is showing less and less restraint in the face of HA's verbal provocations, and HA is becoming more and more vocal in its opposition to the government.

It doesn't look good.

MorAouns and The Convenience of Sectarianism

2006-10-01T17:09:00.000-07:00

When a certain MorAoun struggles with his support in a certain community he tends to remind the community of the war and of the atrocities of the war in an attempt to fan the flames of sectarianism, while others (definitely not out of the goodness of their heart) pursue a path of reconciliation...

Of course, this particular morAounic nature is not unique (though extremely obvious in the afore mentioned MorAoun), and in fact sectarian leaders display it when their level of support in their particular sect is threatened. Nothing like good old fear and hatred of the other to "rally the troops"...

The Danger of The Divine Victory "Parade"

2006-09-21T00:39:00.000-07:00

Friday is the parade "celebrating" the divine victory claimed by Nasralla and his party of God. Everything else aside, the organizers of the parade, as reported by Assafir, are trumpeting the upcoming parade as the biggest in the history of Lebanon. I am writing this post probably hours before the parade itself and I am sure that the danger that lies in such an event is not lost on everyone. In either case, I want to briefly analyze it.

In my view, this might well be a breaking point for March 14. After having lost the initiative when they abandoned their demands for Lahoud's resignation, and then slowed down to a near halt when they acqueisced to HA's blackmail time and time again, the "victory parade" might well do it for them.

Previously, March 8 created March 14 by spurring people on to show that the independence uprising crowd also existed and had a voice that wanted to be heard. There was anger at Hariri's assassination, and resentment at the betrayal of HA.

Now, how do you counter a demonstration of the size projected by HA, and under what pretext? What will mobilize a million Lebanese, many of whom have seen their hopes dashed and their faith in their leadership diminished. What will ensure that their morale will not be crushed when they see hundreds of thousands of HA supporters marching and chanting and celebrating and flaunting their nonchalance to the rule of law and even to the very existance of a state... I say nothing...

On the other hand, and this is a very distant possibility, the demo might fail and few people might show up, in which case this may be an indication that HA's support is on the fall. Like I said, I doubt this possibility, but it has to be included for the sake of completeness I guess.

May they all go to heaven and leave us in hell.

2006-09-19T09:25:00.000-07:00

I have the following quotation extracted from Arthur Koestler's 'Darkness at Noon'. Please generalize this comment to all religious establishments:

"When the existence of the Church is threatened, she is released from the commandments of morality. With unity as the end, the use of every means is sanctified, even cunning, trachery, violence, simony, prison, death. For all order is for the sake of the community, and the individual must be sacrificed to the common good.
Dietrich Von Nieheim, Bishop of Verden:de schismate libri III, A.D. 1411"

Leaving a restaurant - leaving a country

2006-08-26T18:04:00.000-07:00

Today, I decided to grab some Lebanese food from a newly opened restaurant close to my house. Inadvertently, a discussion with the Lebanese store manager about the old TV show "Fame" somehow turned to discussing the movie Syriana and the assassination of the prince at the end of it. By some mysterious influence (Lahoud?) the manager started drawing comparisons between the assassination of that prince and the assassination of Hariri. He was clearly hinting that the Americans had either killed him or greenlighted it. After a few split seconds of me debating with myself whether to shut up or shut him up, I decided on the latter. Pretty soon, he started spewing off one conspiracy theory after the other, providing "alternative" versions of ancient history, modern history, and present day politics (One example of his ramblings is that the US and the UK supported Khomeini against the Shah whom they wanted to get rid of...). I struggled hard to understand what he was saying, to find the logic in his claims. Naturally I found none.
How do you debate or discuss with someone who will have a conspiracy theory to explain every event, every calamity that befalls us? I tried in vain to explain that we need to stop blaming others for our misery, to stop allocating responsibility to everyone but ourselves. I argued and argued and argued. I argued that we have to fault ourselves for failing to build the democratic state that we (I?) desire. I argued that no one internal group should have the right to dictate war. I argued that it was the responsibility of the elected representatives of the people to do so, only through state institutions and legal means. I argued that given the lack or weakness of such institutions and of such a truly democratic process, it is our duty to strengthen them and create them... I got nothing! More deluded versions of past and present, some abstract references to throwing ourselves in the arms of the west, more abstract references to dignity.
Finally, I asked him if the entire war was worth it. I asked him if the "price" we paid for an action most of us did not endorse was worth the "value" that we all received for it... I got the answer I should have expected. We maintained our dignity so it was worth it.
At that point I realized there was no point discussing this anymore. There is no way that I could convince him of my point of view because he simply did not want to listen. That is fine, he wasn't going to convince me either. On the other hand, he had no problem endorsing the imposition of a point of view and its consequences on me(via endorsing the actions of an organization operating outside the realm of the state).
I thanked him for the discussion and left his restaurant, just as I had left my country years before - disappointed.

PS: The man was in his forties or fifties and had lived in the US and Canada since he was in his twenties...

Ziad Majed (2): On an aborted independence uprising

2006-08-20T16:48:00.001-07:00

... On the 14th of March 2005, one month after the assassination of PM Rafic Hariri in a terrorist crime that changed the landscape of Lebanon, a million citizens gathered in Martyr's Square in Beirut heeding the call of the independence uprising against Syrian hegemony and the allies of the Syrian regime, especially those who had gathered on call from HA on the 8th of March. The crowd was record settings by all standards and crowned a month of demonstrations and gatherings and youth and citizen action led well by the wide opposition front, leading to breaking the wall of silence and fear that had "domesticated" and imprisoned most Lebanese and to re-establishing the bond between the people and public affairs in Lebanon. The "uprising" Lebanese made use of international support, at a time when the Syrian regime was under strain due to its assassination of Hariri and to the end of the American given mandate to run the Lebanese file. So Omar Karami's government fell and the fall of the heads of the security apparatuses began, and the country was liberated from a wide "intelligence" rule, and the Syrian army withdwrew on the 29th of April, 29 years after invading Lebanese soil and occupying political life on it. However, this large popular victory did not transform into a decisive political victory. More precisely, it did not cause internal ramifications that reflect its exceptional "external" victory and its liberation of Lebanon from Baathist rule. Between missing the opportunity of forcing the president to resign (as the PM had been) due to the position of the Maronite Patriarch who refused overthrowing him (on the street, before agreeing on a substitute), and accepting (quickly) the conditions of the Shiite political block of conducting elections based on the law of the year 2000, to Jumblatt's change of direction (against himself) and accepting HA's weapons and aligning himself with Saad Hariri and HA, to Aoun's withdrawal from the movement that had taken the name of the famous day, March 14 and his "opening fire" on all those in it and flirting with his newfound allies of the (non-Shiite)symbols of the elapsed Syrian era, arriving to the parliamentary elections taking place between the end of May and the end of June 2005, and the way it was controlled by sectarianism, and finally to renewing "the faith" in the speaker of the "Syrian-era parliament" who was elected speaker of the "Independence era" parliament... political confusion ensued and confusion in founding the new republic as well, and then this came to new heights with the formation of a new government "giving" (president) Lahoud a Christian cut to be added to the Shiite cut monpolized by HA and Amal.

If the sectarian system in its structure and philosophy can explain the high ability for blackmail by the two SHiite organizations being the "exclusive" representatives of one of the largest sects, thus giving legitmacy to the rule if they participate and removing it if they don't, then the logic of lack of trust and narrow sighted calculations and the obsessions of sectarian "weakness or prestige" and the loss of a political compass and the preparations for the postponed presidential battle, and accepting the advice of some arab and international regimes at the founding moment probably explain all the events resulting from them. A new government was founded with its PM and most of its ministers belonging to the new majority, but also involving the two Shiite poles of the minority and the representatives of the president! In other words, it rules based on a "disturbed" agreement with a minority (holding two of the three positions of the presidential troika), and an obscure compromise with those it is supposed to remove!

What is more is that the "lackluster performance" occurred at a time when the country was under a Syrian vengeful attack using a variety of different economic and political weapons, with several assassinations and assassination attempts occurring in its shadow, "dropping" in six months Samir Kassir, George Hawi, Jubran Tueni and his companions, injuring May Chidiac (as it injured Elias Murr, for different reasons, and killed and injured many innocent citizens and foreign workers).

These terrorist assassinations and HA's defense of their perpetrators lead to blowing things up between them and Hariri and Jumblatt and exacerbating matters with all the parties of the parliamentary majority, leading to a governmental crisis, where the SHiite ministers abstained from attending in objection to expanding the international Hariri investigation to inclide the rest of the ensuing assassinations, before returning (even with the continuations of the disagreement) after Hariri resumed holding talks with them, and SIniora declared in parliament that the "resistance" in the south was a national one.

Then came the Aounists' striking of a deal with HA in February 2006 to change much in the political arena in Lebanon. THeir alliance (combining the selfproclaimed father of resolution 1559 and the American bill(?) against Syria with those who accuse - from their position in the Syrian-Iranian axis both- the resolution and the bill of Zionism and serving Israeli interests!) formed a spearhead in the confrontation with the governemnt (eventhough one of them was participating in it) and a shield to protect its "opponent" Lahoud. THis allowed them to form a new sectarian alignment (albeit temporary) in Lebanon to loosen the siege against HA, and tickling AOun's presidential delusions, and balancing the scene that emerged between Feb 14 and March 14 2005. More importantly, it relieved the Syrian regime from the strains of the Lebanese "inside" and transformed itself into a support system for it and its policies, guaranteeing responses to the parliamentary majority in its attack by a "National" alliance combining Muslims and Christians with popular legitemacy.

Except, this alliance, in addition to its political oddities, was founded principally on mutually shared illusions between those who want to regain a position they believe that the christians had lost and who sees that revenge against "personal" damage is by making it public (?), and between those who aspire to remain in a political and military society outside the state but connecting with other sects for Lebanese societal necessety.

In March 2006, what was called the National Dialogue started with the poles of the sects, MPs and heads of parliamentary blocks, continuing to go nowhere on the issues of the presidency, HA's weapons and the defence strategy as well as its procurement of the decisions for war and peace and the relationship with Syria. The "dialogers" failed to arrive at clear agreements and to translate what agreements they did arrive at into policy and implementable decisions.

On all this course, from the day of the uprising to the day of the defunct dialogue, Lebanon missed ,once again, a golden opportunity to build the project of the state due to Sectarian calculations and connections to regional axes and international politics. At this time, the region was witnessing dangerous escalation in sectarian conflict in occupied Iraq and Israeli terrorism in Palestinian land, and in international concern about the Iranian nuclear file. So the Lebanese situation became open to many possibilities most of them coming from its surroundings and founded in its institutional weakness and its sectarian tension, making it easy to affect its political environment.

Ziad Majed on Missed Opportunities in Lebanon

2006-08-19T17:44:00.000-07:00

This is an article by Ziad Majed of the Democratic Left movement in Lebanon, the same party to which Samir Kassir belonged. The original article is in arabic and can be found here. I think it is worth reading. Below is the first part.

Lebanese political alliances only offer evidence of lacking any nationally responsible behaviour, and to lacking any awareness that could lead to the establishment of a modern state in a country which in addition to having a complex sectarian nature, has a tragic political landscape. Perhaps the important events in the last six years, starting with May 25th 2000 (liberation of the south) and passing by March 14th 2005, when most Lebanese rose against Syrian hegemony, and finally arriving at July 12th 2006 when Hizballa captured two Israeli soldiers signalling the beginning of a barbaric Israeli agression - these events all indicate an amazing ability to pass up on chances to acquire the tools needed to build a state deserved by so many citizens of this country .

On the libaration left uninvested in
Lebanese land was liberated in 2000 from Israeli occupation lasting 22 years. Land was liberated in a precedent in the Arab-Israeli struggle, due to factors ranging from armed resistance started by the National Resistance Front and crowned by the Islamic Resistance with a victory that could have been used to signal a new political era in Lebanon returning to the Lebanese interior the idea of the state that was missing completeness after the Taif accord, meaning reachieving the soveriegnty that lacked due occupied land, and the independence that was robbed by Syrian hegemony. However, the connection between the "interior" and the "exterior" and the regional care shown to keep the Lebanese south under the mercy of resolution 242 on the one hand and the sectarianism of the ruling political class as well as the control of the "security" factor of the Lahoud/Sayyed reign on the other hand, prevented this transition to the stage of building political institutions that are "accpetable" by legal and sovereignty standards.

Preserving the "struggle" in the Shebaa farms suited Israeli, Syrian and Iranian interests of controlling the possibility of localized tension, and of maintaining the means for transmitting political message on an occupied land whos legal standing is internationally obscure. Moreover, the Lebanese authority, controlled by intelligence services, did not consider altering its internal politics to absorb tensions let alone trying to find a new form for the relationship with the Syrian regime, which in turn and with its well known stupidity, missed the opportunity for changing its behaviour in Lebanon in an exceptional moment of strength. So we awoke after the elections of September 2000 on a new political scene that laid the foundation for causing a popular uprising against the Syrians and for creating more distance between a HA that is victorious in resistance but that accepted militarily transforming to a "regional mailman" and many Sectarian and non-Sectarian Lebanese powers with different calculations and interests.
That way, Lebanon remained for years as if its south was never liberated (despite the celebrations on Liberation day), and witnessed internal struggles that were similar to other struggles taking place inside the Syrian regime between civilians and military men who had run the Lebanese "file" for years and new intelligence (people) who had a growing stranglehold on its political and monetary affairs.
On the other hand, the national opposition, personified in Qurnet Shahwen and the "Minbar Dimocrati", could not balance the scale of power internally, and matters remained in eb and flow, political life dropping to new lows, until the Syrian extension of Lahoud's mandate and the issuing of resolution 1559 which opened the door - despite the severity of their effects - to radical change wide open.

Hariri and Jumblatt's Press Conferences

2006-08-17T01:19:00.000-07:00

Saad Hariri and Walid Jumblatt both held press conferences....

Hariri
Saad spoke of national unity but stressed the importance of the state, the sole authority in the country. He refused that the state be a synonym for weakness, its institutions discarded and abandoned. He strongly affirmed that the Lebanese cannot have dignity without their state and warned of the dangers that lurk as a result of the latest Israeli aggression, reitirating that it would no longer be allowed for the state to be the weakest player in the country.
He referred to the dangers that originate from the wreckless speeches coming from abroad, an obvious reference to Bashar's speech, citing it as all the more reason for rallying behind a strong state. Saad also spoke of the army, looking forward to the role that it, with the help of the international community, will play in the south. He further attacked Bashar, describing the Syrian president's latest speech as heavy shelling and bombing of a different kind. He described it as a speech inciting hatred and not becoming of the position of the president of Syria, interfering in Lebanese matters, giving lessons in patriotism and resistance while his Golan heights are occupied. Saad then addressed the Syrian people contrasting their love and friendship towards the Lebanese to their regime's hatred and lies, reminding them again of the occupied Golan. He accused the regime in Syria of trading in the blood of the children of Qana, Gaza and Baghdad to further its own goals. He also sympathized with the Syrian people's plight, and with their quest for freedom as they have to watch their dictatorial regime attacking democratically elected governments.
He warned that Lebanon is flanked by two neighbors that it should be wary of, for different reasons, and ended his speech by stressing national unity...

In short, Hariri focused on the need for a strong state and dedicated some time to replying to the Syrian president's tirade against lebanon.

Jumblatt
Jumblatt started his press conference by referring to US president G.W. Bush's policy of pre-emptive strikes, and his invasion of Iraq and the insuing chaos over there. He also referred to the Iranians and their nuclear program.
He said that wars should not play out in Lebanon, whether initiated by Syria and Iran or the US and Israel.
He then reminded Nasralla of the fact that he and others of March 14 who defended the resistance at various occasions on the international scenes, but asked who the "resistance" pledges loyalty to.
More importantly he referred to Nasralla's claims that the Americans and Israelis had this all planned out from before, asking him whether the government deserved to know of such information. Jumblatt went on point by point referring to Nasralla's various speeches highlighting his blatant disregard to the Lebanese state.
Jumblatt then pointed out that it was easy for Nasralla to rebuild the destroyed homes using Iranian money, but that it would not be that easy to rebuild the destroyed trust in Lebanon. He also reminded that not once in any of his speeches did Nasralla mention the Taif accord or the Lebanon-Israel armistice agreement, two very important documents in Jumblatt's opinions. He then asked again, now that the army was heading south... whether it would be possible to finally apply the armistice agreement, or would we have to fight till eternity while not a shot is fired from the Syrian Golan heights... Jumblatt then addressed the topic of dignity, asking whether the only path to dignity is by adhering to the Iran/Syria axis, adding whether a country's "dignity" is achievable without state institutions.
Jumblatt returned to the issue of the army heading south, calling the agreement by which such a move was authorized vague (in reference to the cabinet meeting and decision). He pointed out that Nasralla on the one hand says yes to the army, and on the other maneuvers against it. He then referenced Nasralla's veiled questioning of the Taif state, saying that this was uncalled for. He refuted Nasralla's argument of protecting Lebanon by remaining outside the state institutions by citing all the destruction that fell on the state and the people despite those intentions.

He then asked whether we were destined to be like Abu-mazen and Arafat's authority in Palestine? He pointed out that one day Olmert would fall and Netanyahu would take his place, and the cycle of violence would continue, only in Lebanon the one field for everyone's war games. He addressed the resistance crowd, i.e. the Shia, to respect the feelings of the rest of the Lebanese, who do not want to see their country destroyed... He ended this part of his speech by saluting the fighters, and the people who held strong during the crisis.

Jumblatt then moved on to discuss Assad's speech. He reminded the Syrian regime that Jumblatt had chosen to move past his father's assassination (by Syria), in order to protect both the Lebanese and Syrian people against a surrender to Israel (May 17). He asked whether the only way Assad knew how to conduct resistance was by using Lebanon to improve your negotiating position with the US. He stressed that the Syrian game is clear, pausing to ask Nasralla whether the consensus on the international tribunal on the Hariri assasination still held. Pointing out that criminals usually go back to the scene of the crime, he noted how Assad refers to the Hariri investigation. He also pointed out how Assad was exporting militants to Iraq, wondering whether that will be our destiny in Lebanon as well.
Jumblatt ended by quoting former Iranian president Khatami who had said that promoting moderate islam and moderate christianity reduce the risk of confrontation, and that Lebanon is a model of such moderation... Khatami had also said that Israel sees no problem pursuing some of its historic goals; thus, she should be given no excuse to allow her to do so... Jumblatt then referred to another Shia, the very well respected late sheikh Shamsiddine who had asked the Shias to immerse themselves in their countries and not to create for themselves different paths than those of their compatriots... and not to heed the calls that promise to differentiate between them and others... and to stay firm ... on the Taif path ...

What makes Lebanon so special

2006-08-17T00:02:00.000-07:00

In a comment on Abu Kais's BeirutBeltway blog, one reader questioned why we Lebanese patriots take pride in our army and hold such nationalisitic feelings toward Lebanon. This post is my answer to him.

We take pride in our army because it was the same army that refused to oppress the Lebanese citizens during the massive expression of patriotism on March 14, 2005. Unlike the armies of the neighboring Islamic and Arab regimes that exist only to deprive their people of the right to freedom.We, the patriotic Lebanese, believe in a Lebanon that does not discriminate between Muslims, Christians, Jews, Taoists, or Buddhists. It is this Lebanon that we strive for and I can't see a more noble cause to embrace.
We refuse to be the slaves of archaic Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Arabism, or Phoenecianism. We have come out to demand and obtain our freedom on March 14 and we will not hesitate to stand up for our rights again. From our ranks have risen Samir Kassir, George Hawi, Gebran Tueini, and Rafic Hariri, and like them, thousands more will rise until we achieve our goal.

Lebanese Army Heads South

2006-08-16T22:21:00.000-07:00

The Lebanese army has finally started deploying in south Lebanon,Reuters among many others sources, are reporting.

A column of more than 100 trucks, troop carriers and jeeps, flying red-and-white Lebanese flags, streamed through a makeshift bridge on the Litani to the town of Marjayoun. Some vehicles towed artillery pieces, others carried troops and equipment...
..."We are very happy. How can anyone deploy in his own land and not be happy," said a soldier who did not give his name.

That is all great, but what remains a cause for concern is that

...while the army will not allow the presence of any armed group, the cabinet decision did not mention any withdrawal of Hizbollah's fighters or the rockets they rained on northern Israel during the conflict.

Meanwhile progress is slow with assembling the new and improved UNIFIL force as the BBC reports.

Unifil is already under French command and Ms Alliot-Marie (defense minister) confirmed that France would continue to lead it once it grew in strength. But she refused to be drawn on the number of French troops that would be sent.
"Today, it's not 'How many troops and when?', it's 'To do what and how?'" she said on French TV. She added that only once a clear mandate had been established would it be clear which other countries would join the larger force.

So thats about it, the army is heading south, we are waiting for the UNIFIL troops, as well as the Israelis to withdraw. Meanwhile, we don't know what the deal is on the weapons south of the Litani. Ain't it grand being a citizen of Lebanon?

The Decapitator's "Victory" Speech

2006-08-14T15:39:00.000-07:00

Hizbulla chief, Hassan Nasralla or the Decapitator, as Abu Kais likes to call him, has made yet another TV appearance declaring a strategic and historic victory. He had a lot to say about his appreciation for the sacrifices of the Lebanese people, and of the HA fighters. More importantly and dangerously, his beardedness has declared the launch of a drive to rebuild 15,000 housing units and to provide funds for families that have lost their homes to relocate while the reconstruction procedes...

The most dangerous aspect of his speech, by far the most frightening of all, is his reference to Lebanese politicians who spoke out against him during the battle. He played on sectarian sensitivities highlighting the fact that most of the casualties and destruction were in Shia territories. He stressed that these politicians made a "mistake" by publicizing the internal debate in time of conflict, affecting the psychology of civilians being slaughtered and of the fighters. He made a direct reference to Jumblatt without naming him.

Moving on in the list of dangerously inflammatory statements the decapitator flung in our faces. He addressed the issue of HA weapon's, reminding (read threatening) that HA came out victorious and that not even Israel has gone so far as to expect HA's disarming. He asked those who want HA disarmed whether or not they brought back the Shebaa farms or the prisoners, and whether they are capable of protecting Lebanon. He dismissed the concept of disarming HA as too hasty and simplistic. He agreed to spreading the sovereignty of the state, which he said they were part of, but said that he wants a strong and just state to spread its sovereignty. He the asked if this state fulfills those requirements.

Finally, he asked that the debate be moved to its natural position (the hiwar). He reminded that the two ingredients to the success of Lebanon are the resistance and national unity, asking that we not waste such assets. He described those as precursors to building the strong state he "desires".

In other words, the decapitator is in attack mode, his threats and his bullying continue at all but an accelerated pace. He has declared "victory" on both the frontlines and domestically and is acting as such. He will unabashedly compete with the state for reconstruction, he will not disarm, he has threatened the politicians of Lebanon demanding "unity". The man is talking like a representative of a state, his growing power becoming a threat to a sovereign Lebanon.

We are back to where we started before this war, except that we have a more emboldened HA maneuvering for the upper hand in Lebanon. It is time for democratic Lebanon to act, the initiative cannot be left in the hands of these thugs.

Tense Ceasefire in Effect

2006-08-13T23:09:00.000-07:00

8:00 am Lebanon time, a tense cease-fire goes into effect. One hour into it, the ceasefire seems to be holding, eventhough Israel is saying that it will maintain its blockade of the ports and airports in Lebanon. Also, the Lebanese government meeting yesterday was cancelled, possibly over disagreement over the disarmament of Hizbulla.

Very tense times and uncertainty looms large, but there is hope yet.

And the victory goes to...

2006-08-12T16:09:00.000-07:00

The Lebanese government unanimously adopted UN resolution 1701 today. Although the support vote was unanimous, HA ministers had reservations on some of the details which have not been disclosed yet. I will, however, jump the gun and predict these reservations in the following points:

Complete evacuation of the area south of the Litani of HA weapons
Monitoring air, sea, and land ports for arms smuggling
No mention of the Shebaa farms
No call for a ceasefire
Recall of UN resolution 1559

Information Minister Ghazi Aridi, announced after the cabinet meeting that the UN resolution 1701 was a resounding victory for the diplomacy undertaken by the Lebanese government, an opinion shared by Saniora a few hours earlier. Aridi went further to announce that HA has agreed to respect the full implementation of the resolution, including the weapons free zone south of the Litani. However, a low level HA official declared during an interview on Al-Arabiya that it is unlikely that they (HA) will "give Israel what it could not achieve through war".

Prior to the cabinet meeting, Nasrallah came out of his cave again to claim the victory. His victory is seen from a "slightly" different perspective than that of Saniora's though. Nasrallah only saw his militia's survival on the battlefield and the casualties inflicted on the IDF as his source of pride. True as that may be, his speach was somewhat benign in a sense that he did accept resolution 1701 with reservations, acknowledged the Lebanese people's steadfastness, and committed to a ceasefire as soon as the UN declares one. His true intentions, however, emerge in a comment that some parts of the resolution are considered "an interference in Lebanon's internal affairs." This particular comment takes Lebanon back to pre July 12th with the difference that Saniora's government has the Lebanese army in the south, a reinforced UNIFIL, and a violent 30-day war experience which the government should use to tip the balance against HA. The following few days will show how these positions unfold.

Possible UN resolution by Friday.

2006-08-10T12:59:00.000-07:00

A breakthrough in the negotiations has been made on the international arena between the French and US teams to reach an agreement on a UN resolution by Friday

The breakthrough is based on the inclusion in the call for a cessation of hostilities for a progressive Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory to go simultaneously with the deployment of the Lebanese army backed by reinforced UN peacekeepers

reported Haaretz.
The reinforced UN peackeepers will primarily be backed by French soldiers. Moreover, the area south of the Litani river is to be devoid of Hizbullah guerillas and weapons.

It seems the Israeli maneuver of widening the ground invasion worked its magic. The threat has convinced the Lebanese government (and Hizbullah) to agree to a progressive Israeli withdrawal as opposed to calling for an immediate and complete withdrawal to end the fighting for fear of not reaching a solution. Israel showed that it is ready to take on more casualties by following through with a major escalation in the ground invasion. It's also worth noting that Saniora's initiative to send the Lebanese Army to the south had been a keystone in reaching the possible settlement.

So would it have been possible for both teams, Hizbullah and Israel, to have reached this same conclusion two weeks ago? I don't think it was. Both parties were pumped up with way too much ego, that it took two full weeks of bloody combat to realize neither group can win the military battle. Israel was banking on its ability to destroy Hizbullah in a swift invasion, but was proved wrong. Hizbullah was relying on internal pressure from within Israel to stop the invasion, and was also proved wrong.
I would hope that an agreement is reached by Friday. There are talks that such an agreement would also include details on resolving the Shebaa Farms issue. However, there has been no mentioning of the fate of the captured Israeli soldiers and Hizbullah fighters or the Lebanese prisoners yet.

Nasralla's New Speech: A Sign That He is Bending ?

2006-08-09T12:13:00.000-07:00

A little while earlier, Nasralla showed his bearded, turbaned, war crazed face again, to deliver yet another speech. Like many other times, he sent signals in all directions to all parties involved or affected by this war. Below are some of the key points of his speech, followed by a brief analysis:

- Stressed that HA has worked for an internally unified Lebanon as well as politically and on a government level.
- Asked the refugees and the displaced (mainly Shias) to refrain from activities that provoke their hosts (mainly non-Shias), especially that they have treated them with dignity.
- Stated that the US and Israel are trying to break internal unity.
- Priority is to hang in there and achieve political support
- Don't believe the enemy when they say that members of the Lebanese cabinet have communicated with them
- Everybody in the cabinet agrees to Siniora's seven point plan
- The French-American resolution is unjust and gives Israel more than it asked for and more than what it has achieved on the field
- The lebanese army is already south of the Litani but not at the border
- Our previous objection to the depolyment of the army did not stem from fear of it, but from concern for it
- We agreed to its deployment but worry for it still
- Sending 15000 troops south relieves pressure on the governemnt and allows amendments to the UN resolution
- Sending the army south is an honorable exit startegy
- The US will shoot down any resolution that gives lebanon its rights
- Accused the US of stalling a cease-fire resolution
- The enemy's bombing of infrastructure and it committing massacres is a sign of its failure on the field
- Lebanese civilians are being killed on purpose to pressure the resistance
- We are still on the field fighting strong on the villages at the border
- Security Council cannot protect Lebanon
- Fighting still raging in border towns
- Our survival and steadfastness is a defeat to Israel in itself
- 60 tanks destroyed, 100 soldiers and officers killed, 400 injured
- Israel has failed to diminish the rocket power of the resistance
- Israeli media "iron curtain" to hide their military losses
- We will turn our precious south a burial ground for the Israelis
- I tell the Israelis that you can reach any point in Lebanon but will suffer tremendous losses and you will leave eventually
- changing Commander of northern front big development wiht implications
- I ask the arabs of Haifa to leave the city

So as far as I can read, the man is willing to concede several points to the Lebanese government as long as none of his actions are perceived as a defeat. So far, their mere survival is a victory to them, but they are willing and probably capable of fighting hard for a while to come. He offered again to move the battle strictly to the field, i.e. no rockets in exchange for no airstrikes. More on this as I think about what he said some more :).

Lebanese Army Calls Up Reserves

2006-08-07T10:56:00.000-07:00

The Lebanese army has called up its first reserve, i.e. soldiers who have been released less than 5 years ago.
Such a move is understood as precursor to sending the army south once the international forces are agreed upon and sent to Lebanon.
Is the government of Lebanon finally trying to take initiative ?

Update

The Lebanese cabinet has unanimously voted to send 10,000 troops south as soon as the Israeli army withdraws.

The Proposed UN Resolution, and why it won't fly

2006-08-05T12:19:00.000-07:00

So finally France and US agreed on the text of a resolution:

BEIRUT (Reuters) - The United States and France agreed on Saturday on a Security Council resolution calling for fighting between Israel and Hizbollah to end, but on the ground both sides traded fire and a Hizbollah rocket killed three.

The 15 member U.N. Security Council was due to receive the text at 1900 GMT to review it, the United Nations announced.

"This is a first step. There is still much to be done," said British Prime Minister Tony Blair. "But there is no reason why this resolution should not be adopted now and we have the cessation of hostilities ... within the next couple of days."

You can read the proposed text here.

Of course, it is highly unlikely that HA is going to accept this resolution if and when it is passed. It is going to take something more than this to get a "cessation of hostilities ... within the next couple of days." I am sure Mr. Blair realizes this, and so do the French and the Americans, but I wonder if they understand the situation on the ground.

Israel has the upper hand now, it is blitzing Lebanon and making slow headway inside Lebanese land. However, I do not see that they get to decide when to stop fighting, unless they can eradicate HA. Once they have established their security or buffer zone, only the damned HA will decide when the fighting stops... I fear that bad management of this crisis by everyone involved has only played into the hands of Iran and its proxy, and will only serve to prolong the suffering of Lebanon and its people.

More precisely, here is why I don't think this is going to work.

For a lasting ceasefire, cessation of hostilities has to be at the best interest of the warring parties involved. In this case, those parties are Hizbulla backed by Iran, and Israel. For Hizbulla to agree, it must have something to gain, or it must be able to cut its losses, bearing in mind that Iran as well has to agree. On the other hand, the militant group has a vested interest in continuing to fight, as this keeps at bay the prospect of disarming them, and will lead to them continuing to pressure Israel and the Israeli public. One has to bear in mind that they do not care about the Lebanese public or the interests of Lebanon, only their own and Iran's. More importantly, I think that they (and Iran) want this to drag on, and have the capability to sustain their fighting capabilities on the medium run. It is their only means of survival and salvaging their presence and Iran's on the Lebanese political scene.

That said, nothing has been offered to Iran, and I don't see that anything will (or should) be offered to them. Iran understands this and refuses to be ignored, and refuses to lose its presence in Lebanon. They will continue to support their proxy, spurring them on, doing everything in their power to keep them alive and kicking until they make their point. Iran will not be ignored, they have nothing to lose in prolonging this conflict, but they have something to gain.

The cold hard conclusion, we are up for a long hard process both diplomatically and on the field, which happens to be a country that is being systematically destroyed.

Update
Syrian FM arrives in Lebanon at 1 pm local time (6am ET)

Squabbling in the Israeli Cabinet?

2006-08-03T13:51:00.000-07:00

Haaretz, in its online edition reported the following under the title "PM, Peretz at odds on expanded ground operation":

Defense Minister Amir Peretz told Israel Defense Forces officials on Thursday evening to begin preparing for the next stage of the military offensive in south Lebanon, which would extend the IDF's control to all Lebanese territory south of the Litani River.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, however, is said to be reluctant about expanding Israel's ground operation. While Peretz believes that the short-range rocket threat posed by Hezbollah can be neutralized by taking the area up to the Litani, Olmert feels that such a move would not be able to counter the longer-range missile threat posed by the Shi'ite organization.

So, it would seem, the Israeli PM who has declared victory, doesn't believe his own words. The defence minister on the other hand, seems to be willing to indulge HA in its wishes for an expanded buffer zone, one that would give them further room to declare Israel as an occupation force, fight it, and gain more support among the Lebanese.

What I and many others have complained about, I will now repeat. Israel has no strategy for winning its war. It has failed to set reasonable achievable objectives, and is forcing its own hand. The more they fight and fail, the more they have to fight looking for some form of achievement. Many have wondered before about the stability of Siniora's government and its ability to withstand this war and its aftermath. I wonder if we should be asking the same questions of Olmert's government.

Helicopters Put Down IDF Commandos Near Baalbek (Haaretz

2006-08-01T15:42:00.000-07:00

Haaretz reported that the IDF has landed commandos in Baalbek and tayyar.org quoted unnamed Israeli sources that the objective of the mission is to kidnap Sheikh Yazbek, a senior HA official.

Such a development (if it turns out to be true) would signal that the Israelis are trying to gather bargaining chips and increase the ante in their war with HA. The question of whether or not they will succeed is still open and the results of their actions on the negotiation process remain unkown. (12:59pm ET)

Update

It seems that the fighting is centered around the Hikmeh hospital where the IDF seems to believe Yazbek is. The hospital has been targetted and is burning at the moment. (1:41pm ET)

Update 2

Israel sources say that their forces captured three HA militants. HA say the three are not members of HA. This is borderline comic.

Yossi Sarid's Wisdom

2006-07-30T00:49:00.000-07:00

This was written by Yossi Sarid in Haaretz. I completely agree with him, and I think this is worth posting in its entirety.

Margaliot / You have been warned
By Yossi Sarid

The government didn't mean it and the military didn't mean it and the pilot didn't mean it. "We didn't mean it" is a good argument, certainly, and yet not good enough. That is the last thing we need: to kill 60 civilians, including 30 children, intentionally, with malice and forethought.

The government warned the residents of southern Lebanon, the Israel Defense Forces dropped pamphlets and declared: If you don't run for your lives - you will die. "We warned" and "We warned often" make a good argument, and yet not good enough.

"We are sorry" is also true and very nice, but it is impossible to be too sorry until all the regret is used up.

When hundreds of thousands of people are warned, and women and children are warned, of the bombs and missiles and shells that are about to land on their heads, one must consider the fact that not all of them will flee. It is not so easy to leave home - and who will save those fleeing from the dangers lying in wait along the road? It has happened, and recently, that South Lebanon's refugees were attacked and killed on their miserable way north, and in those cases too we really didn't mean it - sorry! - and we expressed regret.

The contemptible Hassan Nasrallah has also warned us here in northern Israel. He has launched about 2,000 warnings in the form of rockets at our address in the past 20 days, apparently expecting us to be gripped by terror and to get the hint. Some did not understand, didn't want to or couldn't understand it: the elderly and frail and sick and poor and disabled and children with special needs and their parents couldn't. Nor could the owners of chicken coops or orchards, still desperately hoping to save the remnants of their living. Nor could all sorts of stubborn, infuriatingly obstinate people - those not interested in being refugees in their own land.

Instead of abandoning home immediately, tens of thousands of civilians stayed at the front, from Haifa to Kiryat Shmona. Will we agree to excuse Nasrallah of his war crimes just because the farmers and the brave did not heed the call of his Katyusha? Are you kidding - excuse him? A war crime is a war crime is a war crime, and there is no crime without criminals.

That Nasrallah doesn't feel the slightest tremor in his black heart when he essentially invites the IDF to act like him and to kill Lebanese the way he kills Israelis. He is actually interested in killing; he is interested in spilling blood, which greases the wheels of his ambition and those of his masters - preferably the blood of small children. But why are we obligated to be his collaborators? Why do what he wants and play into his hands?

Yesterday, Nasrallah sent another warning that fell nearby. Our colleague Yuval Azoulay was not just warned, but wounded and rushed to the hospital. I wonder if Haaretz will now evacuate its reporters from the north because that scoundrel insists on it. You there at Haaretz - you have been warned.

And as I finish writing, another Katyusha falls on Eitan's chicken coop at the edge of town. What is wrong with us? How many warnings must be sent before we get it? We don't get it, so we stay - less for our heroism and more for our simplistic principles that are afraid to unravel. And if Nasrallah hurts us, our blood will be on his head - even though he warned us.

Here is Qana and here we will leap out of this war - together with all the warned people, whether residents of shelters in South Lebanon or northern Israel. And we'll cry out from the depths of our hearts: Enough.