Eye on Lebanon: Losing the cause

Do not isolate the Shias because of Hizbullah. Not all support the party and many would stop supporting the party given a chance to do so. I have actively advocated this idea for a long time now, and I am glad to see this is the message Walid Jumblatt sent in one of his recent editorials for Al Anbaa.

Hizballah will always have a core of passionate supporters. However, I have seen no serious attempt to work with those who feel compelled (for financial reasons) to follow Hizbullah and take them away from the party.

An important development, if true, is the revelation of the Syrian Al-Hakika daily that Mugniyeh's body has been taken out of Damascus at the direct request of Sheikh Nasrallah, before the Syrian investigation into the assassination.

"Honestly, we don't blindly trust them (the Syrians) at the security level. Our experience with them in Lebanon - especially under Ghazi Kanaan's term - was a bitter one, regardless of the common perception of the public opinion. Not allowing them to see the body deprived them of the opportunity to fabricate an investigation that had nothing to do with the truth. We thus provided them with the autopsy and medical information they needed, in the best conditions and scientific criteria..."

The Hizbullah - Syria relationship is very different than the party's relationship with Iran. During the civil war, Syria supported and armed Amal against Hizballah. In the mid 90s a number of Hizbullah's members and supporters were gunned down on Syrian orders. This is a complicated relationship. Just imagine that Hizbullah would have allied itself with the Lebanese and instead of fighting for Shebaa (which is a pretext) with Israel would have fought Syria? Then indeed Hizbullah would have been right to claim it is a national resistance.

The $100,000 question is: who killed Mugniyeh? Syria points the finger towards Saudi Arabia. I, for one, prefer to wait some more before expressing a personal point of view. However, it is clear that neither the Iranians nor Hizbullah are happy with the Syrians, and allies, or no allies, I doubt this will stay without an answer. Sure, Hizbullah will continue to use the assassination to accuse the Zionists, the CIA and so on but that is something the masses expect to receive.

Behind the scene the fact that Mugniyeh was killed on Syrian soil may very well carry serious repercussions for Assad's regime.

And a warning from Hizballah for Israel: "Their biggest shock will be a confrontation with the combatants in their own home and inside their settlements and not in the South of Lebanon. Our wars until now were defensive. However, and in case there is a coming war, it will be an offensive one. I don't mean we will wage the war, but any war they will carry out in the future will become what is called by the regular armies a counter-attack. They will see our combatants behind their lines and not just in front of them. The land confrontations, and for the first time since 1948, will be inside Palestine itself..." (http://syriatruth.org/Al-Hakikah/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3258)

Another ongoing problem in Lebanon that was widely, yet superficially discussed is Berri's absolute irresponsible behavior. He closed the Parliament doors and threw the keys away months ago. His game is obvious: stall as much as possible for Syria. Berri is a talented politician, and that in itself has nothing to do with ethics or morals. However, what he tries to pull works in the sole interest of Damascus. Syria will do anything, and I mean anything in its power, to stop and/or influence, and make a deal on the Tribunal. By now we are beyond the silly game of asking, is Syria really guilty? And I'm not talking about about Hariri's case. We talk or we should start talking about decades of oppression in all its shapes and forms, killings included.

For years, Berri's solution was to hold talks and shuttle diplomacy. By dialogue, he means monologue. March 8 has certain demands and they don't go to the table to negotiate but to impose. It's either their way or bringing the country to the brink of ruin. The danger of playing Russian roulette is that at some point the bullet has to come out. Hopefully, Lebanon can manage the tension and that will not develop into clashes. But the risk is there and is real.

Speaker Berri is touring the Arab world and I expect to hear soon that he moves on to other regions and continents.
He asks for the 1960 electoral law to be used in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

Apparently he has no problem with Gen Michel Suleiman being the next President of the Republic however, he wants Suleiman to lead an interim government (let's applaud the generosity of March 8 for not asking for a national unity government anymore) that would oversee the 2009 parliamentary elections. 

Conclusion? Suleiman said he does not agree with a temporary solution, so we are back to square one, again.

It's not only Berri and Hizballah doing their best to waste precious time, nota bene, for different masters and different set of interests. The Free Patriotic Movement is in the same boat. I almost don't want to write about FPM. I truly believed in this party and I thought that Gen Aoun will put the interests of many before his own. That he is a different, better type of leader. I was wrong.

The Christians are the first to suffer because of his reckless behavior. I can find reasonable motives for FPM's agreement with Hizbullah, but I cannot, under any circumstances understand how Gen Aoun got to be not an ally, a partner, but a cover and an employee of those he fought through SALSRA, UN 1559 and through the very spirit of March 14.  FPM was the engine, the core of the Cedars Revolution and look at it now.

A dear friend said once that those who follow personal gains, whether financial or narcissistic, lose the cause. He is right. There are good chances to see FPM empty handed at the end of the road for making this stupid mistake.