LCCC
ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 11/09
Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 5:17-19.Do not think that
I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but
to fulfill.
Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or
the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have
taken place.
Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches
others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys
and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special
Reports
Hizballah After Lebanon's Election: Down But Hardly
Out-TIME 10/06/09
What Have the
Lebanese Elections Said?By: Hazem Saghieh 10/06/09
Exclusive: Obama's Speech Was a Missed
Opportunity (Part One of Two).
By: Nicholas
Guariglia
10/06/09
Nasrallah is walking a thin line when it comes to Lebanese elections-The
Daily Star 10/06/09
Lebanon Vote Tilts to
the West/By
Aram Nerguizian and Ghassan Schbley/10.06.09
INTERVIEW-Hezbollah says ready to open new page
in Lebanon-Reuters
10/06/09
Latest News Reports From
Miscellaneous Sources for June
10/09
A new cold war in the Middle East-The
Australian
'Moderate' new Lebanese gov't won't make peace with Israel-Israel
Today
Geagea:
Nasrallah's 'Popular Majority' Inconsistent with Taef
-Naharnet
Election Battle Over, Speakership Battle Begins between Berri, Oqab Saqr
-Naharnet
Assaults on MP Sabaa's House,
Skirmishes in Bakhoun and Upper Metn -Naharnet
Saniora
Hopes Short Lifespan for Caretaker Cabinet
-Naharnet
Lebanon Charges 10 More
With Spying For Israel
-Naharnet
Barak Not Comfortable with
Supply of U.S. Arms to Lebanese Army
-Naharnet
Aoun to Demand Share Not
Less than 45% of Cabinet Seats, Plus Veto Power
-Naharnet
Hariri:
Hands Extended for Unconditional Dialogue, My Entire Bloc is for the President
-Naharnet
Bellemare Holds Talks in
Paris
-Naharnet
Mitchell in Lebanon, Syria
this Week as Part of U.S. Commitment to Peace
-Naharnet
Argentina Asks Lebanon
Help in Bombing Case
-Naharnet
Berri: Election Sign of
Unity Among Lebanese
-Naharnet
Lebanon Diagnoses 5 More
Cases of Swine Flu
-Naharnet
Nasrallah Accepts Defeat,
Says No Need to Worry About Poll Results as Resistance a Popular Choice
-Naharnet
Lebanon accuses Israel of election tampering-Ynetnews
UN chief hopes for quick formation of new Lebanese
government-Xinhua
'This result is what the people of Lebanon wanted'-Jerusalem
Post
US
envoy assures Israel of strong alliance-Daily
Star
Ban presses next Lebanon cabinet on
UN resolutions-Daily
Star
Saudi ambassador lauds Lebanon's election calm-Daily
Star
Syrian paper accuses US of interfering in Lebanon polls-(AFP)
Hizbullah slams 'flagrant' US interference in local affairs-Daily
Star
Saudis gleeful over March 14 victory in Lebanon's polls-Daily
Star
Turkey: All Lebanese people are 'victors' after elections-Daily
Star
March 14 victory seen as boon for Lebanese economy-Daily
Star
Five more cases of swine flu in Lebanon-Daily
Star
Feltman
Insists U.S. Will Not Deal with Hizbullah
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffery Feltman said
Hizbullah should be disarmed and become a political party that functions in
accordance with the Lebanese constitution. Feltman, in an interview with Alhurra
Arabic language satellite TV network, said that Hizbullah should abide by U.N.
Security Council resolutions that call for the disarming of all Lebanese and
non-Lebanese militias. Feltman reiterated that the U.S. does not and will not
deal with Hizbullah. He said Washington does not deal with a party that
threatened its people through the use of arms in May 2008. He told Alhurra that
the U.S. looks forward to cooperate with the new Lebanese government and its
people in order to strengthen its institutions, independence and sovereignty. On
U.S. aid to Lebanon, the top official reiterated that assistance depends on the
moves the new government will make. Asked about possible cabinet ministers,
Feltman said that it is up to the Lebanese people to decide the formation of the
cabinet. Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 09:08
Mitchell in Lebanon, Syria this Week as Part of U.S.
Commitment to Peace
Naharnet/U.S. peace envoy George Mitchell is to visit Syria for the first time
this week as the Obama administration steps up its diplomatic engagement with
key regional player Damascus, a senior official said Tuesday. "As part of the
president's commitment to work to advance a comprehensive peace in the region,"
Mitchell will visit Damascus on Friday and Saturday following stops in the
Palestinian West Bank city of Ramallah on Wednesday and Beirut on Thursday,
State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said.
It will also be Mitchell's first visit to Lebanon. Officials in Beirut said
Mitchell, who is currently in Jerusalem, would arrive in Lebanon with EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana following elections. Kelly said Mitchell's trip to
Syria and Lebanon is partly a "follow-up" to President Obama's speech in Cairo
last week aimed at improving ties with Arabs and Muslims.
He declined to link the timing of the envoy's visit to Damascus with the Lebanon
election aftermath, saying only it was an "appropriate time" to make such a trip
and the administration rated it a "very high priority." But a State Department
official who asked not to be named said Mitchell, who applied for a visa to
Syria weeks ago, preferred to make the trip to both Beirut and Damascus after
the elections in Lebanon.
The Obama administration has been cautiously pursuing diplomatic engagement with
Syria, which has long had strained ties with Washington, in a bid to promote
Arab-Israeli peace.
Jeffrey Feltman, the acting assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern
Affairs, and National Security Council Senior Director Daniel Shapiro visited
Damascus last month. It was their second visit to the Syrian capital since Obama
took office in January pledging to engage with all Middle Eastern countries,
including Washington's foes such as Syria and Iran.
Ties between Washington and Damascus worsened sharply after the US-led invasion
of Iraq in 2003, and the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005
which was blamed on Syria. Washington recalled its ambassador in February 2005
following Hariri's murder and no decision has yet been taken on his replacement.
Damascus has denied any involvement in Hariri's killing, but withdrew its troops
from Lebanon two months later, ending almost three decades of domination.
The United States accuses Syria and its non-Arab ally Iran of giving material
support to the radical Palestinian movement Hamas and Lebanon's Hizbullah in
their conflicts with Israel.
It also charges that Syria has turned a blind eye to Islamist militants entering
Iraq through its border. In Jerusalem, Mitchell said Washington wants the
stalled Middle East peace talks to resume soon and wrap up quickly. Mitchell,
whose visit comes just days before hawkish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu is due to outline his cabinet's peace policy, sought to play down the
rising tensions between the two close allies over Washington's peace drive. "We
all share an obligation to create the conditions for the prompt resumption and
early conclusion of negotiations," Mitchell said.(AFP) Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 07:25
Argentina Asks Lebanon Help in Bombing Case
Naharnet/An Argentine judge has asked Colombia and Lebanon to help arrest a man
suspected of orchestrating the 1994 bombing of a Jewish charities building in
Buenos Aires that killed 85, court sources told AFP on Tuesday. The bombing of
the Argentine Jewish Mutual Association, a Buenos Aires headquarters of Jewish
charity groups, has gone unsolved for a decade and a half. Some 300 people were
wounded in the attack. Argentine investigators have blamed former top officials
in Iran for being behind the bombing, and in mid-May issued an international
arrest warrant for Samuel Salman El Reda, a Colombian of Lebanese descent, in
connection with the bombing.
At the time of the bombing El Reda lived in Buenos Aires, and according to
Prosecutor Alberto Nisman, was the link between Iran and Hizbullah, who
investigators say were behind the attack. El Reda lived in Buenos Aires until
the day of the bombing -- July 18, 1994. His current whereabouts are unknown,
but his wife recently traveled to Lebanon, where El Reda has relatives,
officials said. Judge Rodolfo Canicoba Corral, in charge of the case, is to send
representatives to Colombia and Lebanon to explain the case and ask for help, a
court source told AFP speaking on condition of anonymity. Canicoba Corral
earlier called for the arrest of several former Iranian officials in connection
with the bombing, including ex-president Ali Akbar Rafsanjani, former security
minister Ali Fallahijan, ex-foreign minister Ali Velayati, former Revolutionary
Guard chief Mohsen Rezai, and Mohsen Rabbani, who worked at Iran's embassy in
Buenos Aires. Officials in Tehran have rejected all charges related to the case,
and has refused to collaborate with Argentine investigators. A 1992 bombing of
the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires that killed 22 people and wounded 200 also
remains unsolved. Argentina has South America's largest Jewish community.(AFP)
Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 07:18
Assaults on MP Sabaa's House, Skirmishes in Bakhoun and
Upper Metn
Naharnet/Parliamentary elections were marred by a series of security mishaps,
most remarkably the continuous attacks against al-Sabaa family in Beirut's Bourj
al-Barajneh neighborhood.
Security forces, however, managed to curb the incidents which took place in a
number of areas. In this regard, the house of MP Bassem al-Sabaa, who lost the
Shiite seat in the majority March 14 coalition, was attacked for the third
consecutive day. Local media on Wednesday said Sabaa's home in Bourj al-Barajneh
was attacked with stones and there were attempts to break into the house, where
both his family and brother's family live. Also overnight, a relative of Sabaa
was beaten up in Bourj al-Barajneh by members of a political party, they said.
Sabaa, in a statement, called on Speaker Nabih Berri and Hizbullah chief Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah to "personally interfere" to stop what he termed "raids"
against his house and the houses of many Sabaa family and relatives. Sabaa said
the same houses have been subject to attacks for the past three days by bike
riders. Meanwhile, the car of journalist Sanaa al-Jack, a journalist working for
pan-Arab Asharq al-Awsat daily, was reportedly attacked Tuesday night. Media
reports said unknown assailants tore up the wheels of Ms. Jack's car that was
parked outside her house in Beirut's Barbour neighborhood and poured oil on its
engine. Also in Bakhoun in Dinniyeh, the army and security forces contained
skirmishes between citizens over the elections at dawn Wednesday. The army
arrested several people suspected of involvement in the scuffles that landed a
number of injured in hospital.
As for the town of Douar in the upper Metn, Lebanese Forces supporters and
Syrian Social National Party partisans clashed against the backdrop of election
results. But security forces brought the situation under control. Beirut, 10 Jun
09, 10:45
Election Battle Over, Speakership Battle Begins between Berri, Oqab Saqr
Naharnet/Once again tension is in the air. If recent rhetoric is any indication,
a battle indeed is brewing between Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and MP-elect
Oqab Saqr.
The race for the speakership is centered around Berri, who already announced his
candidacy for another term before parliamentary elections, and Saqr, the
majority March 14 coalition's favorite candidate. MP Ahmed Fatfat said he favors
Saqr to win the speakership. "I will personally elect Oqab Saqr house speaker,"
Fatfat said in an interview with Al-Arabiya TV network, pointing that Berri "did
not carry out his role as Speaker, but acted as a leader to a political
movement." Fatfat said, however, that if the majority March 14 coalition is to
elect Berri for another term, "then this should take place as part of a
political agreement that would guarantee Berri's practice in the next four
years," reaffirming his intention to elect Saqr as Lebanon's new speaker. Berri
maintained silence over the issue, saying only to Al Akhbar newspaper that he is
"natural candidate." "It is still early to go into this," Berri added, drawing
the attention to the need for "giving consensus among the Lebanese all the
attention." Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat, meanwhile, renewed
his support for Berri for another term as speaker. He said, however, that March
14 forces did not yet begin discussions on the issue, adding that his support
for Berri is a "personal position," pending the meeting of his allies.
Jumblat, in an interview with Al-Akhbar, stressed on putting the May 2008 bloody
events "behind us."
"Otherwise, we will never get over this issue," he insisted, asking: "Did Berri
have the right to close parliament doors? Was Berri not implementing a
constitutional right when he shut parliament doors?" "These arguments will never
end. Whatever happened, happened. I don't want to go back to the past," Jumblat
went on. "Let's start a new phase after June 7."
MP Saad Hariri, for his part, told BBC radio that he would hold a meeting with
Jumblat and other allies to decide on the new speaker. While Hariri described as
"excellent" his relation with Berri, he pointed to the "need to see what the
political interest is." "Berri has played a positive role at some stages, but we
were at odds with him in other stages," Hariri added.
Al Akhbar, however, quoted well-informed sources as saying Hariri supports the
unconditional re-election of Berri. It said Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea
and National Liberal Party chief Dori Chamoun, however, disagree with their
allies. The daily Ad-Diyar, meanwhile, quoted opposition sources as saying there
were "no major objections," thus, Berri's return to the speakership is certain.
Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 08:24
Geagea: Nasrallah's 'Popular Majority' Inconsistent with
Taef
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea criticized on Wednesday Hizbullah
chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's latest remarks that his party had the most
popular support despite its loss to the March 14 alliance in the parliamentary
elections. "This is in violation of the Taef agreement because (parliamentary)
seats are equally divided between Christians and Muslims regardless of the two
team's numbers," Geagea told Lebanese expatriates who visited him in Maarab.
"The resistance choice is not a choice of an armed group, but a popular choice
proved in recent elections," Nasrallah said on Monday, pointing to a difference
between a "parliamentary majority" and a "popular majority." Geagea, however,
lauded Nasrallah's acceptance of the official results with sportsmanship and in
a democratic spirit. He also said that the March 14 coalition received more than
50% of Christian votes in Sunday's elections. Geagea told his visitors that it
was the right of expatriates to vote. "Imagine that we do not bring in
expatriates … particularly that this is their legitimate and legal right."
"Those who say that the expatriates were bought, are committing a crime against
Lebanon," the LF leader stressed. Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 12:28
Saniora Hopes Short Lifespan for Caretaker Cabinet
Naharnet/Prime Minister Fouad Saniora hoped on Wednesday that the next cabinet
would be formed quickly and said the experience of veto power in the previous
government wasn't successful. "The international and regional atmosphere is a
primary factor to any change in the next stage," Saniora told visiting
journalists who congratulated him on his victory in the parliamentary elections.
"The veto power experience wasn't successful. I hope the life of the caretaker
cabinet wouldn't be long," the PM said in response to question. "The
parliamentary majority should meet to take a stance from the minority's
proposals through cooperation and not confrontation," Saniora added. He also
urged the Lebanese to work in Lebanon's interest. Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 13:51
Lebanon Charges 10 More With Spying For Israel
Naharnet/Lebanon's military prosecutor charged 10 more suspects on Wednesday
with spying for Israel, continuing a crackdown on spy rings that has now seen a
total of 68 people charged. "They are accused of collaborating with the Israeli
enemy for money and giving it information about civilian and military outposts,"
a judicial official said. Forty of those charged are currently in custody,
including a retired general and a policeman. Those detained are 37 Lebanese
citizens, two Palestinians and an Egyptian. Lebanon remains at a state of war
with Israel and convicted spies face a possible life prison term with hard
labour or the death penalty if found guilty of contributing to Lebanese loss of
life. The charges come just days after Sunday's election which saw a
Western-backed alliance take 71 of the 128 seats in parliament, defeating a
rival bloc led by Hizbullah.(AFP) Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 12:23
Barak Not Comfortable with Supply of U.S. Arms to Lebanese Army
Naharnet/Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak criticized on Tuesday the supply of
U.S. arms to the Lebanese army, saying such weapons could end up in Hizbullah's
hands.
"We don't like the supply of American weapons to Lebanon's army over recent
months, as well as those planned; these arms are likely to reach Hizbullah's
hands," Israeli daily Haaretz quoted Barak as saying during a conference in
Ramat Gan. The minister also said that the new Lebanese cabinet should abide by
U.N. Security Council resolution 1701 that ended the 2006 war between Israel and
Hizbullah. "The new government in Lebanon needs to be given a political chance,
but it must abide by agreements - first of all, resolution 1701," he said,
according to Haaretz. Israeli Deputy Premier Silvan Shalom also commented on the
victory of the March 14 coalition in Sunday's parliamentary elections in
Lebanon. Speaking during a tour of Kiryat Shmona, Shalom said: "These results
are very significant because they keep Lebanon alive and prevent the
consolidation of Iran's power." He also told reporters that "there is always a
fear of high tensions on the northern front, but in light of the blow Hizbullah
suffered in 2006, it will think twice before doing something." Shalom warned
last week a victory by Hizbullah in the elections would be very dangerous for
the stability of the Middle East, and by that, the stability of the entire
world.
Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 08:09
Aoun to Demand Share Not Less than 45% of Cabinet Seats,
Plus Veto Power
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun will reportedly demand
a share not less than 45 percent of seats in the new Cabinet, in addition to
veto power.
The daily Al Liwaa said Wednesday, citing a well-informed source, said
opposition parties have asked specialized companies to provide them with a study
on numerical election results "with the aim of showing a different picture of
the result reached by March 14 forces." Those parties, according to Liwaa, aim
at focusing on what the opposition calls a "popular majority" and also show the
Christian majority The source said a meeting on Wednesday scheduled for Aoun's
Reform and Change bloc would touch on the opposition share in the new
government.
He said Aoun, not only would seek veto power, but would also demand a share not
less than 45 percent seats in the new government. Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 12:02
Hariri: Hands Extended for Unconditional Dialogue, My
Entire Bloc is for the President
Naharnet/MP Saad Hariri stressed that his hands were stretched out for
"unconditional dialogue" toward his political opponents.
Hariri, in separate interviews with BBC Arabic and pan-Arab daily al-Hayat,
hailed the latest speech by Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, describing
it as "very positive."
He stressed the need to meet Nasrallah and Speaker Nabih Berri to "discuss the
next phase which poses a great many dangers.""We'll see how we could unite our
efforts during consultations with the President of the Republic, who will have a
say in the (new) government that will be formed," Hariri said. He pointed to the
president's role both as an arbitrator and a wise man, stressing that he would
place his entire parliamentary bloc at Suleiman's disposal. Beirut, 10 Jun 09,
10:00
Bellemare Holds Talks in Paris
Naharnet/Special Tribunal for Lebanon Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare is in Paris
for talks with French officials, pan-Arab daily Al Hayat said Wednesday.
It quoted well-informed sources as saying Bellemare's visit is "normal" given
that France is a member state to the Security Council and has funded and
supported the international tribunal set to try suspects in the 2005
assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Beirut, 10 Jun 09, 09:11
Berri: Election Sign of Unity Among Lebanese
Naharnet/Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said Tuesday that the parliamentary
elections is a sign of unity among the Lebanese. Following his meeting with
former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and members of the Carter Institute for
Democracy, Berri said: "Remember that 36 hours prior to the elections I said
that the polls are decisive on the international level but a sign of unity for
the Lebanese.""Notice that the elections took place despite everything, and I
repeat again that the polls were a unifying factor according to all statements
without exception," he said. Carter praised the "wonderful" manner in which the
Lebanese were capable of concluding a "peaceful and legal election with heavy
participation. " He expressed his hope that this process would lead to the
formation of a "cohesive government working for Lebanon's future and peace."
Carter hoped that peace would also extend to include the Palestinians and
Israelis as this would end Palestinian suffering and guarantee their rights in
Gaza and the West Bank. Beirut, 09 Jun 09, 18:57
March 14 victory seen as boon for Lebanese economy
Beirut Stock Exchange surges by 15 percent after vote
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Bassem Mroue/Associated Press
BEIRUT: Lebanon's March 14 coalition victory over the Hizbullah-led opposition
in the weekend election showdown is expected to boost confidence in the
country's economy, analysts said Tuesday, as the "Switzerland of the Middle
East" struggles with economic reform efforts stalled by years of conflict.
The parliamentary battle between the March 14 coalition - headed by Saad Hariri,
son of slain billionaire and former Premier Rafik Hariri - and the Syria- and
Iran-backed opposition was billed as a battle to determine whether this volatile
Mediterranean nation would be able to move past the political deadlock and
toward economic reform.
An early sign of the election's impact appeared minutes after the Beirut Stock
Exchange opened Tuesday, the first working day this week, with shares of
Solidere, Lebanon's largest construction and development firm, rising 15
percent.
"There is demand in Lebanese markets today. The [election's] effect was
positive, and people saw it as a good sign," said Fadi Mubarak, head of treasury
at Lebanon's Credit Bank.
Final results from Sunday's race showed March 14 winning 68 seats to the
Hizbullah-led alliance's 57, with three seats going to independents.
The outcome served as a reflection of the fears voiced by many Lebanese that an
opposition win would alienate the country's main donors in the West and drive
away Persian Gulf investors.
"What is also helping is the political courting between Lebanese leaders,"
Mubarak said, referring to efforts by March 14 and Hizbullah officials to tone
down their rhetoric after the vote.
The fears appeared to have been well-founded. Amid the global economic crisis,
Lebanon - a nation whose famed banking secrecy laws as well as towering mountain
backdrop had earned it a comparison to Switzerland - could ill afford to
alienate anyone. Unlike many other Arab nations, it lacks oil wealth and has
relied on its history of commerce and tourism to build
its economy.
During a visit to Beirut last month, Vice President Joe Biden warned that the US
will evaluate the shape of its assistance programs based on the composition of
the new government and the policies it advocates. Washington has branded
Hizbullah a terrorist group while the movement is widely viewed among many Arabs
as a political player and one of the few groups with the ability to stand up to
Israel militarily.
The US has provided Lebanon with more than $1 billion in assistance since 2006,
including $410 million to the military and the police.
Similar fears were voiced in relation to the oil-rich Gulf Arab countries'
willingness to continue funneling investments into a country.
Paul Salem, the Beirut-based director of the Carnegie Middle East Center, said
the outcome of the election "will be more confidence."
"We're in the beginning of a summer season, and I think it reinforces the sense
of Lebanese, as well as Gulf [investors] ... that Lebanon is on a reasonably
stable path and is a good place in which to invest," he said.
That perception is particularly important in Lebanon, which has weathered
decades of conflict, civil war, assassinations and sectarian strife while
struggling to rebuild after each cycle of violence. Rafik Hariri, who was killed
in a truck bombing in 2005, was credited for his role in rebuilding downtown
Beirut, which was destroyed during the 1975-90 Civil War. Hariri, a contractor,
took the helm of a country aching for economic stability.
His death cast a pall on those prospects, even as Lebanon's various factions
struggled for control in a feud that pushed the nation to the brink of civil war
in 2008.
Hopes are now that the election of a Western-backed government will allay
outside concerns, particularly as the global recession has squeezed growth rates
worldwide. Lebanon has so far managed to weather the financial meltdown, and
Central Bank governor Riad Salameh said in March that economic growth this year
is expected to come in around 4 percent. The rate was far below the roughly 7
percent growth rate Lebanon recorded in 2008, but appeared to exceed
expectations.
Still, one of the country's most pressing issues is reducing its national debt.
"While the Lebanese economy has been resilient amid the political downturn,
there are a number of issues that the government must address, including
reforming the energy sector and reducing its public debt, which is the highest
in the world at 162 percent" of gross domestic product, analysts at Standard
Chartered Bank wrote in a Tuesday report.
"Now that the power vacuum has been filled, the Lebanese government can focus on
economic issues," the report said.
Cedars Revolution defeats
Hezbollah in election:
Put March 14 to the Test"
By Dr Walid Phares
Voting against Terror
According to the latest polls, the March 14 coalition which was formed in the
wake of the Cedars Revolution and the Syrian withdrawal in 2005, has obtained a
majority in the Lebanese Parliament, defeating the Hezbollah political and
financial machine. This victory, in a very challenging local, regional and
international context, is a benchmark with multiple lessons to learn. The
following is a first evaluation of the results, although they may and will be
challenged by Hezbollah and their allies.
Under threat since 2005
Even though it was seen by the international community as the last straw, the
assassination of Rafiq Hariri and his companions wasn’t the final tragedy
Lebanon had to experience in 2005. The March 14 majority in parliament and the
country’s executive branch were targeted for assassination, intimidation and
destabilization by the Syrian-Iranian “axis.” As of July of that year,
politicians, journalists, MPs and simple citizens were murdered, wounded and
kidnapped by the terror networks operating inside the country even after the
withdrawal of Assad’s troops. Deputies Jebran Tueni, Walid Eido, Antoine Ghanem
and Pierre Gemayel, who was also a minister in the cabinet, were killed by car
bombs and hit teams. In the fall of 2006, Hezbollah and its allies staged urban
unrest, followed in May 2008 with an armed invasion of West Beirut killing
dozens of citizens and burning media establishments. The May coup crumbled the
will of the Marh 14 Coalition and forced them to accept drastic concessions in a
conference organized by a new Iranian ally, the Emir of Qatar. This June
parliamentary election was the last window of opportunity for the Lebanese
resistance (against Hezbollah, Syria and Iran) to score a democratic victory,
allowing them to gain time as the regional and international environment was
turning gradually against democracy forces in the region since 2007.
International Abandonment
In September 2004, the United States and France led an international consensus
to issue UN Security Council 1559 asking Syria to withdraw and Hezbollah to
disarm. Strengthened by international backing, Lebanon’s democracy movement took
the streets and showed its determination to struggle for freedom, emulating
Eastern Europe and South Africa more than a decade earlier. As long as
Washington and Brussels stood firmly with UN resolutions and with the
democratically elected government, Hezbollah’s violence didn’t reduce their
determination. However, as of the fall of 2006, with the publication of the
Baker-Hamilton report and its adoption by a new leadership in the US Congress,
the Bush administration was restrained from supporting the Cedars Revolution, so
that chances for “a deal with Iran and Syria” were expanded. The change in
American policy emboldened Hezbollah and Syria and more terror was unleashed
against the democracy forces epitomized by the May 8, 2008 attack. When the
Obama administration consolidated the idea of “engaging” Tehran and Damascus,
the latter’s allies in Lebanon prepped themselves for a full takeover in Lebanon
this June. In short, the Cedars Revolution was believed by many to be eliminated
in today’s election.
Hezbollah’s machine
In a new regional and international environment where the Lebanese democracy
public felt abandoned by the West, the Iranian-backed militia was deploying a
titanic apparatus. First, the organization has been receiving between $300
million to one billion a year from Iran’s oil revenues. Such amount invested in
a small country like Lebanon defies all norms of democracy processes and creates
among Shia a robotic bloc of support to Hezbollah. Since Iranian funding was
also backing political factions among Christians, Sunnis and Druze, the
unbalance in the political debate was significant. Second, Hezbollah’s security
and paramilitary forces practically control the south, the Bekaa, and south
Beirut, and that is more than half of the country. Add to it a very efficient
propaganda network with TV, radio stations, newspapers and a web of relationship
with Western media correspondents, journalists and bloggers. Technically such a
giant can't be beaten.
Voters surge
But against most prognostics, including American and European media and think
tanks, Lebanese voters opposed a resistance to the Hezbollah goliath and against
all odds, broke most projections. While it was a fact that Shia areas in the
south and the Bekaa would fall to Hezbollah’s candidates unchecked, most
analysts predicted a win to the movement’s Christian and Sunni allies in Saida,
Mount Lebanon and some districts in the Maronite hinterland. The ballistics
placed March 14 at around 45 seats and the rest of the 128 would go to
Hezbollah’s coalition. But a surge of voters, particularly in Christian and
Sunni districts created significant upsets for the militia’s candidates. The
most important wins against the “axis” were scored in Zahle, the Bekaa’s largest
Christian town; in Kura a northern Christian district traditionally in the
pro-Syrian camp, and in Saida where anti-Syrian Sunnis defeated pro-Syrian
Sunnis. The anti-Hezbollah vote was victorious in Batrun and Besharre in the
north and clinched two of the seven seats in the Matn central district. The
surge in vote took out General Michel Aoun’s “fortress” in the Bekaa and snapped
away from his bloc half a dozen legislators. Aoun’s alliance with Hezbollah cost
him among Christians but his movement nevertheless won in three important
districts: Jbail, Kesrawan and Metn.
New Map
The new political map, at this stage of the results, gives the March 14 Movement
(anti-Syrian and opposed to Hezbollah’s weapons) 71 seats which enables it to
impose a Prime Minister of its choice and remain in control of ministries such
as defense and interior. More symbolically, three anti-Syrian wins are chilling:
Nadim Gemayel son of the slain President Bashir Gemayel, Nadia Tueni, daughter
of the assassinated MP Jebran Tueni, and Sami Gemayel, brother of the murdered
MP and Minister Pierre Gemayel, were all elected with high margins. What a
lesson to the terrorists.
Message to Washington and the West
The Cedars Revolution’s electoral victory surprised those Chanceries in the West
who were preparing for a forthcoming dialogue with a Hezbollah controlled
government in Lebanon. In his Cairo speech the U.S. President spoke of
recognizing “elected governments if they are peaceful.” Some saw in it an
insurance policy in the case of a Jihadist electoral success in Lebanon. But now
that the incumbent majority in Beirut received 68 seats plus potential 3 other
“independent” seats, the United States will have to craft a new strategy for the
little Levantine country. Washington will have to decide if opening to Hezbollah
is a good option or backing March 14 all the way is a better strategy. The Obama
administration must learn the lessons of its predecessor: If you announce a
policy, in this day and age, you’ve got to be prepared to follow through.
In addition, Lebanon’s democratic victory against Hezbollah, although modest and
still very precarious, should send a strong message to the theorists of foreign
policy in the Obama administration and the European Union: Yes, people East of
the Mediterranean see democracy as we see it in the West, when freedom is
available and when we don’t sell them out in deals with authoritarians. The
majority of Lebanese have told the West that the region’s civil societies crave
for the “same” international values, not for Khomeinist or Jihadi views of the
world.
March 14 to the test
But in the end, real decisions regarding the future of Lebanon won’t be produced
in the White House, in the Palace of the Elysee, or in Manhattan’s U.N.
building. It is up to the March 14 politicians to take the lead and form a
government as mandated by their voters. The public gave them a mandate in June
of 2005 to fulfill the goals of the Cedars Revolution. Instead they brought
Hezbollah to the cabinet, tergiversated on the disarming of militias, failed to
seize the opportunity provided by the U.N. Security Council, didn’t use their
majority vote to elect a president early on and simply wasted too much time as
Hezbollah was wrecking havoc in the country. Incredibly, and despite terror, the
voters renewed the mandate for another four years. March 14 leaders must use
that time intelligently, swiftly and learn from past mistakes. For Hezbollah is
today five times stronger than half a decade ago, as determined to take them
down as before and the United States is on a different course than “spreading
democracy.” The winners of today’s elections must fulfill the will of their
citizens and succeed in convincing the public abroad of their ability to
confront the threat.
******
Dr. Walid Phares is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
in Washington DC, a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy in
Brussels and the author of the NGO memo that introduced UNSCR 1559.
Exclusive: Obama’s Speech Was a Missed Opportunity (Part One of Two)
By: Nicholas Guariglia
FamilySecurityMatters.org
At the beginning of his highly anticipated speech in Cairo, President Obama
urged Americans and Muslims alike to “say in public what we say in private,” and
to speak “openly [about] the things we hold in our hearts… that too often are
said only behind closed doors.”
It is too bad Obama did not live up to this standard throughout the duration of
the speech. Time and again, Obama told the Islamic world what it wanted to hear,
not what it needed to hear. In doing so, Obama reinforced false premises,
trespassed into dangerous rhetorical territory, and missed a golden opportunity
to take firm philosophical control of an all-important ideological war that
wages to this hour.
Despite calling for “mutual interest and mutual respect,” President Obama kept
holding the Muslim world to a lower standard in order to score persuasion
points.
Let’s start with the reference to his middle name, Hussein, for example.
Americans understandably see strategic advantage in Obama’s Islamic-orientated
background and racial ancestry. His ethnicity, in other words, can conceivably
“win over” the fence sitters in the Islamic world.
Yet doesn’t this excuse Muslim prejudice? Isn’t winning hearts and minds in the
fashion cheap and the opposite of tolerance? Who else in the world is allowed to
openly embrace the election of a foreign leader based solely on the color of
said leader’s skin? Could we imagine Americans responding with widespread
adulation to the election of a Caucasian in Egypt or a Christian in Saudi
Arabia? Will Joe Biden’s America — or Mitt Romney’s or Hillary Clinton’s —
revert back to its Great Satanism?
President Obama would have been far wiser, and his words far more enduring, if
he had instead tried to convince the Muslim world to appreciate the United
States both when our leaders do and do not look like him.
Obama’s statement that “tension has been fed by colonialism [which denied]
rights and opportunities to many Muslims” was equally foolish. Once upon a time,
only the likes of Osama bin Laden invoked the specter of colonialism. Now
President Obama is adopting this talking point, even though the United States
has never been a colonizing power — a point even Obama acknowledged during the
speech. To concede that age-old injustices are contemporary legitimate
grievances is not only asinine history, its precarious leadership. Yet again, it
allows the Muslim world to hold itself to a lower behavioral standard.
Rather than reaffirming Jihadist propaganda, President Obama could have reminded
the Muslim world that Western leaders do not — and would never be allowed to —
cite the 400-plus years of Islamic conquest that preceded colonialism as
justification for modern-day military interventions. No serious European or
American leader would ever think of referencing centuries-old historical
grievances to validate actions in the here and now. No one in Western society
would tolerate such exploitation from their leadership, which is all the more
reason why we should never grant our theocratic enemies this privilege, either.
Underscoring al Qaida’s claims, Mr. Obama, will never undermine them.
Likewise, the history in the speech was terrible. While Obama said, “Israel must
also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work and
develop their society,” he did not mention all of the Israeli attempts to do so.
There was no mention of the Madrid conferences, or the Camp David accords, the
97 percent deal turned down by Arafat, Oslo I and II, the Hebron Agreement, the
Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum, or the Taba diplomacy.
He did not mention the half-dozen wars started by the Arab world with the
intention of liquidating the Jews. He did not mention Israel’s historic
withdrawals — southern Lebanon, Gaza, etc. — that usually preceded further
Islamic attempts to destroy Israel.
Rather than talking to Muslims about the “displacement brought about by Israel’s
founding,” he could have reminded his audience that Palestine was the ancient
home of Jewish peoples, and was subsequently conquered by Persians, Macedonians,
Romans, Byzantines, Franks, Arabs, Ottomans, and the British Crown.
Rather than placating Hamas and telling Palestinians, “Resistance through
violence and killing is wrong and it does not succeed,” Obama could have
highlighted a few decades’ worth of examples where Palestinian violence did
succeed in extracting the U.S. taxpayer’s dollar — and then he could have
strongly said that such bribery-through-violence will be put to an end during
his presidency.
Rather than telling the audience what it wanted to hear about Palestinian
“humiliation” under “occupation,” Obama could have instead reminded the Muslim
world that their opposition to occupation is selective. Where were the protests
of Egypt’s occupation of Gaza? What about Jordan’s occupation of the West Bank,
or Syria’s occupation of Lebanon, Morocco’s of Western Sahara, and Indonesia’s
of East Timor? When it comes to Islamic occupation, nobody in the Muslim world
says anything to anyone, anywhere.
As for atrocities committed against Palestinians and Muslims, Obama could have
asked where the outcry was when Damascus bulldozed the city of Hama, flattening
more than 10,000 innocents. He could have asked where the outrage was when
Jordan green-lighted Black September, killing upwards to 25,000 Palestinian
nomads. He could have inquired where the indignation was when Kuwait ethnically
cleansed a third of a million Palestinians, or why none of the Arab world’s 22
dictatorships grant Palestinians as many rights as Israel does.
To paraphrase Dr. Walid Phares, President Obama’s speech was the first time a
world leader addressed a religion — the “Islamic world” — in this fashion. Mark
Steyn expands on this view in a recent column:
It’s interesting how easily the words “the Muslim world” roll off the tongues of
liberal secular progressives who’d choke on any equivalence reference to “the
Christian world.” When such hyperalert policemen of the perimeter between church
and state endorsed the former but not the latter, they’re implicitly
acknowledging that Islam is not merely a faith but a political project, too.
Islam is the belief-system of over one-sixth of the planet, and rather than
address the incompatibilities between radical Islam and modernity, President
Obama spent an inordinate amount of time talking about the Palestinian plight
and Israel’s shortcomings. It was a missed opportunity.
Part Two will publish Thursday.
**FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Nicholas Guariglia is a polemic
and essayist who writes on Islam and Middle Eastern geopolitics. He can be
reached at nickguar@gmail.com.
Lebanon vote tilts to the West
By Aram Nerguizian and Ghassan Schbley |
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
The pro-Western alliance favored by the United States won Sunday's parliamentary
elections in Lebanon.
The result is a boon for the Obama administration, but it also presents a
challenge. The United States would be well-advised to play for the long term in
Lebanon with a pragmatic policy that deals with the reality of Hezbollah's
political power while continuing to strengthen moderate forces and national
institutions.
This parliamentary election - the fifth since the end of Lebanon's civil war --
evaluated the strength of the two main political blocs: the March 14 Alliance,
the current majority bloc, which is seen as pro-Western and close to
conservative Sunni Arab regimes, and the opposition March 8 Alliance, which is
seen as close to Syria and Iran.
With the election complete, the next step for the Obama administration is to
help ease tensions in Lebanon and engage all communities rather than support one
side against the other. A positive and impartial approach to navigating Lebanese
politics will strengthen national institutions and positively influence the U.S.
image in the Levant.
Lebanon being Lebanon, however, it isn't nearly that simple. Both alliances
include Muslims (both Sunnis and Shi'ites), Christians and other ethnic groups
and religious minorities. Lebanon's constitution guarantees its 18 religious
communities representation in Parliament. This makes Lebanese politics a game of
high-stakes poker that is never winner-take-all and requires every player to
blink in the end.
Lebanese parties and institutions have to negotiate and compromise with their
adversaries, including Hezbollah. All sides are well-aware that past conflicts
over competing sectarian and communal interests have led to instability,
violence and civil war.
U.S. policymakers have cultivated a close relationship with the leadership of
the March 14 movement, named after the March 14, 2005, mass demonstration in
Beirut to commemorate the assassination one month earlier of former Prime
Minister Rafiq Hariri. March 14 demanded an end to the 30-year Syrian presence
in Lebanon.
The March 14 victory offers the United States a pro-Western, anti-Iranian
partner in Beirut, and Washington should encourage the new government to reform
and strengthen Lebanese institutions - particularly the presidency and security
forces. Any domestic reform is as vital to Lebanon's long-term security as is
curbing Syrian and Iranian influence.
However, Washington should avoid characterizing the victory as that of the
"good" or "bad" forces. While March 14 won the polls, in his victory speech,
Parliament member Saad Hariri, son of the slain former prime minister and a key
leader in the March 14 Alliance, said, "There is no winner and loser in these
elections; the only winner is democracy and Lebanon." A significant portion of
the population - which includes an important number of Christians and most
Shi'ites - voted for the March 8 Alliance, named after the March 8, 2005,
pro-Syrian mass demonstration in Beirut.
The Obama administration should increase its engagement toward some moderate
March 8 leaders and avoid alienating the Shi'ites, one of Lebanon's main
communities. It also should encourage the new government in Beirut to espouse a
similar approach. This could create a space to distance it from radical policies
and ideologies.
The United States should continue to cooperate with the Lebanese government even
if it includes some members of Hezbollah, just as it did in 2005 and 2008, when
Hezbollah joined the March 14-led governments.
Hezbollah may opt not to demand the new government's key ministries: interior,
defense, finance and foreign affairs. It understands that to do so would make
Lebanon an international pariah state and also could make Hezbollah itself
accountable in ways that could undermine its power base.
The new government should encourage the continuation of the national dialogue
with regard to disarming Hezbollah and other armed groups in Lebanon.
A new centrist alliance could emerge, encompassing all major Lebanese
communities and sharing power. History has demonstrated that no single party or
limited coalition can rule Lebanon, so such an outcome could be desirable both
for Lebanon and for the prospects of continued U.S. engagement.
The real test for Lebanon will occur during the formation of the new government.
New alliances may trigger intense political disputes that could spill over into
civil disobedience and violence. And whoever forms the next government must deal
with the disarmament of all non-state actors, including Hezbollah; the
continuing operation of the United Nations Special Tribunal for Lebanon to
investigate political assassinations; and institutional reform - all critical
challenges for Lebanon's future.
*Aram Nerguizian is a resident scholar with the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in
Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Ghassan
Schbley is a national security project associate at the Rand Corp.
What Have the Lebanese Elections Said?
Wed, 10 June 2009
Hazem Saghieh/Hayat Newspaper
General elections are an occasion for rectifying what took place in past years
and announcing the prevailing movement with the popular legitimacy for the
coming years. At such a turning point, policies are judged and myths fall apart.
This was carried out with great success, despite the fact that the pre-elections
performance of the March 14 forces was not at its best, and despite the
existence of weapons in parallel with the official weapons that overshadowed the
electoral process and were behind threats and uncontrolled betrayal stances.
For the elections to take place in the shadow of illegal weapons, and for the
party fighting these weapons to win, it is one of the most bizarre features of
political life and electoral processes that constitutes an extremely rare
exception.
Nonetheless, the majority of the Lebanese were able to level down many policies
and myths, mythological policies, and political myths.
After today, it would be better not to say – in the same light tone used in the
past – that the results of the 2005 elections came as “an emotional reaction to
the assassination of Rafic Hariri”, without acknowledging any other political
and independence-related content to them. It is not appropriate anymore for
those who say this to repeat their favorite excuse that these results were
brought about by “Ghazi Kanaan’s elections law” and that the majority of the
previous parliament had resulted from “thievery” provided by the “quadripartite
alliance”. In addition to the symbolic meaning of Fouad Saniora’s victory in
Saida, it has become too trite to consider that most Lebanese only see him as an
enemy, or that this majority is angry at his economic policy while it deals with
the suspension of economic life with glee.
More importantly, most of the Lebanese said that they do not feel comfortable
with the weapons of the resistance, and feel nothing but fears and obsessions.
They consider that the July 2006 was neither “a divine victory” nor a victory
except to the same extent as May 7 was “a glorious day”. This easy discourse
mode has deafeningly fallen, and its controversial nature has become obvious,
and hence its denominational and minority nature too.
The elections have revealed a lot about Christians, whose regions witnessed the
fiercest battles. While they previously delegated Michel Aoun as their primary
political leader due to their disillusionment and empty leadership positions,
they have started today to take back their delegation. This is reflected in the
failure of the main figures of Tayyar (Abu Jamra and Bassil) and the Takattul
(political bloc) (Skaff), in addition to the serious battles and tight
differences in most of the circumscriptions where Aounists won. It is true that
Aoun maintained some of his victories, particularly in Kesserwan, but the losses
in Beirut I and Zahleh, and the transformation of Zghorta to an exception in the
North are no less important issues.
This means that the Christians who previously “covered” Hezbollah’s weapons have
begun to diminish, and with them the pretexts that assure a passing “popularity”
to the resistance sects. Also, the traditional and ordinary voice on Lebanon and
its role is being restored. Perhaps this is not what is sought by anyone aiming
for a democratic, multiple and sectarian society, but this is assuredly better
than turning into a launching pad for small rockets and a receiving land for
bigger rockets.
And yet, the announcement of the majority of Lebanese of their opinion and
convictions is one thing, and adoring power and its camp is another. Now, more
than ever before, democracy and resistance seem to be at opposite ends. Taking
care of this issue will probably be the title of the coming chapter in the life
of the Lebanese, their suffering, and their feeling that no matter what they
decide, the weapons will remain pointed at them!
INTERVIEW-Hezbollah says ready to open new page in Lebanon
Wed Jun 10, 2009
* Hezbollah in reconciliatory mood after poll defeat
* All options open on new government
By Nadim Ladki
BEIRUT, June 10 (Reuters) - Hezbollah said on Wednesday it was ready to open a
new page with its U.S.-backed rivals after losing Lebanon's election but would
wait to see what they offer before deciding on joining any coalition government.
Hezbollah's rivals, led by Sunni Muslim leader Saad al-Hariri, won Sunday's
election against the Iranian-backed group and its allies. The vote capped four
years of crises that took Lebanon to the verge of civil war last year.
"Hezbollah has decided to turn the page on the last phase and open a new page
for the coming stage," Sheikh Naim Kassem told Reuters in an interview. "We will
also behave in a highly positive manner and cooperate with the other side."
He said it would be up to the other side to show goodwill.
"We will wait for what the other side offers. If it decides on a programme, a
vision and a method that is different from the past and that opens new horizons,
they will find us by their side," Kassem said. "But if issues remain as before
at a state of tension and monopoly (of power), then we will take a stand."
Shi'ite Hezbollah and its allies have veto power in the outgoing cabinet, a
contentious point at the heart of much of the political wrangling over the past
four years.
Kassem said the group and its allies had not yet agreed a common position on the
new government. He would not comment on whether veto power would be a condition
for their participation.
"We don't have a pre-determined or final position," he said.
Asked whether Hezbollah and it allies might stay out of the next government, he
said: "All options are open on how to deal with the government. This is linked
to what we are offered because we will not participate at any cost."
Hariri, whose father Rafik, a former premier, was assassinated in 2005, has said
that he will consult allies on whether to take the post of prime minister.
Parliament is expected to nominate a new premier by the end of the month.
Kassem said Hariri, also an ally of Saudi Arabia, was "a strong candidate" for
the role, but added that it was up to the majority to decide. "The test is the
programme, not the name of the prime minister," he said.
Hezbollah, classified by the United States as a terrorist organisation, is a
political and guerrilla group that has battled Israeli forces for a quarter of a
century. Its rivals have consistently challenged its status as an armed group
resisting Israel and demanded that it disarm.
Kassem said the fate of Hezbollah's weapons was not an issue for the new
government but rather a matter for leaders to discuss during meetings chaired by
President Michel Suleiman.
"The new government will not be faced with a debate entitled 'the weapons'. This
matter is left for the dialogue." (Additional reporting by Laila Bassam; Editing
by Samia Nakhoul)