LCCC NEWS BULLETIN
MARCH 9/2006

News from Miscellaneous sources for 9/03/06
Families of missing lobby for inclusion in dialogue
Women's Day underscores citizenship rights proposal
Jumblatt, Hariri reported to be holding NY meet
Hashash pledges to continue election battle
Despite dialogue hiatus next Cabinet session expected to go smoothly
Lavrov: UN to tackle Shebaa Farms issue
Lawyers demand release of jailed generals
Postponement may help participants clarify their positions
For Atlas of Lebanon, drawing lines is politically delicate act
While the U.S. dallies, climate change sneaks up on us
Four reasons why Mahmoud Abbas remains relevant
While the U.S. dallies, climate change sneaks up on us
Iran threatens U.S. with 'harm and pain'
Sidon port fisherman's basin to get spring cleaning
Sidon's garbage disposal nightmare continues

Families of missing lobby for inclusion in dialogue
Daily Star staff-Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: The Committee for the Families of the Kidnapped and Missing in Lebanon on Wednesday called on the government to address in the national dialogue the fate of those missing since the Civil War. In a gesture of solidarity, mothers of missing Lebanese offered red roses to the mothers of Lebanese detainees held in Syrian prisons. The latter group has been holding a sit-in outside UN House in Downtown Beirut for the past 10 months.
Both groups called for "serious and efficient" action to determine their children's fate.
Speaking on International Women's Day, Khiam Rehabilitation Center for the Victims of Torture President Mohammed Safa said: "If this national human crisis (missing Lebanese) continues, and the fates remain unknown of Lebanese detainees in Syrian and Israeli prisons as well as in mass graves, then the national dialogue will be incomplete."
SOLIDE (Support for Lebanese in Detention and Exile) leader Ghazi Aad urged the government to create a DNA data bank of the missing persons' parents so the government can identify any additional corpses uncovered, in addition to those already unearthed. "Twenty-six corpses were found in the Anjar mass grave, yet the relatives of these victims have not been determined," Aad said. "Arbitrary disappearance is an unforgivable crime."
Speaking on behalf of the Committee for the Families of the Kidnapped and Missing in Lebanon, Maryam Saidi said that the repatriation of French researcher Michel Seurat's body should send a message to Lebanese officials.
Saidi said she was envious of the Seurat family for the attention it received from French and Lebanese authorities, but thanked widow Marie Seurat for her concern about the 17,000 missing Lebanese. - The Daily Star

Women's Day underscores citizenship rights proposal
By Meris Lutz -Special to The Daily Star
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: International Women's Day may have passed quietly for most people, but all Lebanese - men and women - may soon have reason to celebrate if MP Ghinwa Jalloul's proposal to extend the citizenship rights to women succeeds.
The proposal, which Jalloul submitted two weeks ago, would allow women to pass on their nationality to their children and spouses, giving them equal citizenship rights to men.
Jalloul said pressing security concerns and Parliament's National Dialogue make it difficult to give the issue the attention it deserves, but that "we will not wait forever; Mothers' Day is on the 21, if we couldn't do it for women's day it could be on Mothers' Day."There is no doubt that the Lebanese woman's lot has improved over the years, if slowly. Before 1946 a Lebanese woman who married a foreigner would lose her Lebanese nationality, and just three years ago working women were unable to receive fringe benefits like health care. Now, thanks to Jalloul, they not only receive those benefits but so do their children, regardless of nationality. "The reason citizenship hasn't been dealt with before is that it's a cultural issue; citizenship is something related to blood, and this is through the father only in Lebanon," she said.
Jalloul also said politicians were afraid that allowing women to pass their nationality on to their husbands and children would disturb the delicate balance of the confessional system and open the door to Palestinian assimilation.
"Women, in many respects, have come a long way," she said, adding: "I would want to see the cultural barrier that prevents women from moving forward brought down completely. ... Men have been ahead of women for a long time."
The theme of women's citizenship rights was echoed at AUB on Wednesday, when the Women's Right's Club and the Collective for Research and Training on Development-Action (CRTDA) hosted a panel discussion, "My Nationality, a Right for Me and My Family," after three days of hard campaigning.
Women's Rights Club president Rania Jaber opened the discussion by announcing the campaign had collected over 450 signatures for their petition to change the law that prevents women from passing their citizenship on to their families.
The panel consisted of two lawyers, Iqbal Doughan, president of the Working Women League in Lebanon, and Ossama Salman; as well as Nadira Nahas who is married to a non-national, and Gina Bashier Muhyeldeen, who doesn't have Lebanese citizenship as her father is Iraqi. "Why should we be forced to leave the country we grew up in?" asked Muhyeldeen, a law student.  "I can't work here, and in Iraq there's a war. I need to help my mom, but I can't. My brother has to go to work in Iraq in the middle of the war even though he was born here," she added. The panel called on the government to change any law that prevented women from having the same rights as men, in accordance with the Lebanese Constitution, article 7 of which says men and women should be treated as equal citizens. "We need to continue to fight in this country because it is our country and no one can take out rights," Muhyeldeen said. "We're either citizens or we're not, where's the Switzerland of the Middle East?"

Jumblatt, Hariri reported to be holding NY meet
Compiled by Daily Star staff -Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: Lebanon's parliamentary majority leader MP Saad Hariri will head to New York Thursday, where he is expected to hold a meeting with leading politician, MP Walid Jumblatt, at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in Manhattan, sources in New York told The Daily Star Wednesday. But contacted by The Daily Star, Hariri's press office said they had "no confirmation" on the trip. "Hariri has a national dialogue to resume" a spokesperson said.
Jumblatt also met with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan late Wednesday. The meeting was ongoing as The Daily Star went to press but the two are expected to discuss the investigation into former Premier Rafik Hariri's assassination as well as the creation of an international tribunal to try suspects in his murder, in addition to redeploying the Lebanese Army in the South, according to a source in UN headquarters.
UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric called Jumblatt "obviously a major political force" in Lebanon and said Annan "would very much be interested in his views on the situation." Jumblatt will also hold a news conference at the UN building Thursday. He has been on a trip to the U.S. since last Saturday, where he met with top U.S. officials including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and head of the World Bank Paul Wolfowitz - and made political statements that - according to observers - led to a halt in the national dialogue. Less than three years after losing his U.S. visa for saying he wished a top Pentagon official had been hit by a rocket, Jumblatt acknowledged to reporters Tuesday night that his remarks about then-deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz had been harmful. A day after a rocket attack in Baghdad he said he hoped it would be more effective next time in order "to get rid of this germ and people like him in Washington, who are wreaking havoc with the Arab land in Iraq and in Palestine."But the two men have evidently buried the hatchet, and Jumblatt met Tuesday with Wolfowitz, who is now head of the World Bank. Jumblatt said the former Pentagon official had credited him in an interview with being a participant in Lebanon's "freedom revolution."
The focus of his meeting with Wolfowitz was on how the bank can assist the Lebanese economy. Jumblatt said his visit to the United States came at a historical moment especially as Washington played a major role last year in pressuring Syria to pull out its troops from Lebanon, An-Nahar's Washington correspondent reported Wednesday. The March 14 leader added that the U.S. was still interested in seeing Lebanon restore its full sovereignty and independence. He said he had asked U.S. officials to help in freeing the country from the Iranian-Syrian axis in the region. Jumblatt, always sharp-tongued and with a history of shifting alliances, was an ardent supporter of Syria until two years ago. In a news conference Monday at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center before calling on Rice, Jumblatt criticized U.S. strategy in Iraq, saying, "It was a big mistake to destroy the Iraq Army." The result, he said, is that Syria and Iran are free "to play" inside Iraq. - With Naharnet

Hashash pledges to continue election battle
By Hadi Tawil -Special to The Daily Star
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: Parliamentary candidate Pierre Hashash vowed Wednesday to stick with his campaign until the end, no matter what. Speaking to The Daily Star, the candidate said: "I am continuing with my candidacy until the end, despite all the political pressure exerted on me - and there is pressure."According to "everyone's MP," "there are people who are falsely pretending to be sent by [compromise candidate Pierre] Dakkash, the Interior Ministry and Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir, to urge me to withdraw my candidacy. "However, I have received phone calls from Dakkash denying that he sent anybody."
Hashash stressed he had nothing against Dakkash personally, "because we have similar political beliefs. However I am against raping the spirit of democracy in Lebanon."The candidate criticized the 2000 electoral law, saying it "marginalizes the role of minorities and neutral people like me to the advantage of sectarian leaders."
He also had strong words for Lebanon's leading politicians. "Our so-called leaders fight and reconcile on our behalf and now they are suddenly exchanging kisses at the national dialogue."Recalling by-elections held three years ago in Baabda-Aley, in which a consensus was reached on MP Henri Helou, he said "no one made a fuss" when the Free Patriotic Movement put forth Hikmat Deeb as a candidate to ensure the integrity of the democratic process. "But because I am a candidate from the common people everybody is urging me to withdraw."While vowing to continue, Hashash said: "I will not have a campaign nor will I attend funerals and weddings. I want people to elect me for my beliefs."

Despite dialogue hiatus next Cabinet session expected to go smoothly
'It will not affect work'
By Majdoline Hatoum - Daily Star staff
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: Lebanon went into a political recession Wednesday following the postponement of the national dialogue the day before. However, according to several ministers, Thursday's Cabinet session is expected to go smoothly.
Speaking to The Daily Star, acting Interior Minister Ahmad Fatfat said "a regular agenda is set for the Cabinet to discuss."
Asked if he expected the dialogue's postponement to affect the session, Fatfat said: "I expect it to be a quiet session tomorrow. We had agreed that if the dialogue is postponed, it will not affect work inside the Cabinet."The session will be held at the Economic and Social Council in Downtown Beirut and, according to sources close to Baabda Palace, will be headed by President Emile Lahoud. This will be the second week in a row that Cabinet sessions are held in central Beirut. Restaurant owners in the central district are already complaining of lost revenue due to the shutting of their doors for the last Cabinet session and the national dialogue. Sources said a suggestion to move the Cabinet sessions to the Mansour Palace in Mathaf would be discussed outside of the agenda Thursday. The palace had been the Cabinet's meeting place during the 1975-1990 Civil War."I didn't hear of such a suggestion, but if it is brought up for discussion we will see about it," said Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel.
Meanwhile, March 8, 2006 came and went without any significant action by the country's pro-Syrian factions.
The date marks the one-year anniversary of a massive rally, organized predominantly by Hizbullah and Amal, held in "support and gratitude" to Syria shortly before it withdrew its forces from Lebanon last April.
On the other side of the political divide, the March 14 Forces seemed hesitant about planning a commemoration of last year's rally from which the political camp took its name.Lebanese Forces MP Tony Zahra said the issue "had not been seriously discussed." "We have not made any decision on whether we should do anything on March 14," he said. "It is still a topic of discussion with other political factions from the March 14 Forces."
Meanwhile, Premier Fouad Siniora met with the Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon Abdel-Aziz Khoja and Qatari Ambassador Mohammad Jaber Soweidi, who asserted Qatar's full support to Lebanon. Also, Lahoud received a letter from Assad in which the Syrian president said his country would "support Lebanon and the Lebanese people facing pressures from countries with ill intentions toward both Lebanon and Syria."

Postponement may help participants clarify their positions
By Philip Abi akl -Thursday, March 09, 2006
More than one factor was behind the decision to adjourn the national dialogue four days after it began and three days ahead of the deadline set by Speaker Nabih Berri to end the talks. Berri has even said he wanted to give restaurant and shop owners in Downtown Beirut a chance to recoup their losses after the central district was turned into a ghost town by the strict security measures enforced during the dialogue. Preferring to wait and respond directly to statements made by MP Walid Jumblatt from Washington, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah withdrew from Tuesday's dialogue session, saying he did not want to sit with "second-grade politicians." Nasrallah was referring to Information Minister Ghazi Aridi, who sat in for Jumblatt at the roundtable after the latter quit the talks two days in and headed for Washington.
The resistance leader wanted to reply to Jumblatt's claims that the Shebaa Farms are Syrian, that Hizbullah is a militia, and that the army needed to be deployed in the South. However, before leaving the session, Nasrallah asked the March 14 Forces members present if they supported Jumblatt's charges. Some said that despite being Jumblatt's allies, they rejected his statements and were awaiting his return for clarification, especially as participants had made progress on the issue of the resistance's arms and that concessions had been made to advance the dialogue.
Many observers are scratching their heads over Jumblatt's statements, especially as they were made from Washington.
In an attempt to prevent further damage to the talks, Berri proposed everyone taking a break from the dialogue.
This "compulsory break" also became necessary after it was realized no mechanism had been created to proceed with the dialogue. Accordingly, Berri called for a special mechanism by which to set the rules of procedure for the sessions.
The participants may return to the roundtable Monday, after Jumblatt clarifies his statements.
One of the dialogue's participants stressed the conference had the support of international and regional governments, mostly because it is "Made in Lebanon" and free of foreign interference. The dialogue was also seen as a positive because tensions were easing as the country's leading politicians sat down and talked to each other instead of hurling accusations through the media.However, dialogue cannot lead to national consensus without taking into consideration regional and international developments. The postponement may help politicians reconsider their positions according to regional developments.
Another participant in the talks said the dialogue would lead to the holding of parliamentary elections based on a new electoral law, which would then pave the way for the election of a new president. Supporters of this theory also propose the creation of a new Cabinet to oversee the parliamentary and presidential elections. Meanwhile, well-informed sources are expecting the arrival of Arab and international envoys dispatched to Lebanon to gauge the level of progress and provide assistance, most notably concerning the Beirut I donors' conference scheduled for May.
Finance Minister Jihad Azour had asked the dialogue's participants to discuss economic issues and rush to prepare for the donors' conference by implementing necessary reform projects. To do so, Lebanon's leaders should back the reform plan before submitting it to the conference for discussion.

Lawyers demand release of jailed generals
By Rym Ghazal -Daily Star staff
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: The lawyers of the four Lebanese generals arrested six months ago for their involvement in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri have asked for their clients release on legal grounds, stating the arrest warrants "were issued without evidence linking them to the killing." The three lawyers of the former security chiefs, Akram Azouri, Naji al-Boustani and Issam Karam, sent a joint memorandum to Investigating Magistrate Elias Eid asking him to withdraw the arrest warrants he issued on September 3, 2005, against their clients "for lack of legal reasons to keep them detained."
A source close to the detained generals told The Daily Star that Jamil Sayyed, Ali Hajj, Raymond Azar and Mustafa Hamdan were arrested solely on "the recommendation" of German Judge Detlev Mehlis, the former head of the UN commission investigating Hariri's murder.
"At the time of the arrest, Eid didn't know about the Syrian witnesses who later appeared in Mehlis' report. He just followed the recommendations of the commission. Thus the arrests were, in form, judiciary arrests because a judge executed it, but in substance they were police arrests because he did not have the complete elements of the case. Police arrests should not exceed three days," said the source. Lebanese law gives a judge the full right to arrest anyone, "provided the judge is fully informed of the investigation and knows all the elements," said the source, "which wasn't the case in these four arrests."
The former security heads were arrested by Eid then charged with complicity in the murder as well as with attempted murder and terrorism, punishable by death in Lebanon. The lawyers are arguing that Mehlis based his accusation against the four on the confessions of falsified Syrian witness statements, like those of witness-turned-suspect Mohammad Zuheir Siddiq, who was recently released in France, and Houssam Houssam, who fled to Syria.
"Eid can't proceed any further with the investigation, as he can't interrogate the two Syrian witnesses on whose statements the generals were arrested, so why keep the suspects indefinitely detained?" said the source.
France released Siddiq last week after the French judiciary rejected Beirut's request to extradite him to Lebanon on the grounds that Lebanon still has capital punishment. The lawyers have asked for their clients to be released but remain under house arrest. The source also claimed: "For the last six months, the suspects have not been interrogated again by Eid. He only interrogated them on September 3, when they were arrested. So what is the point of keeping them in prison?"
The lawyers have been seeking to interview Siddiq, arguing it is their legal right to interview witnesses in the cases against their clients, and repeatedly requested an interview with him from the French authorities but were denied. They now say that with his release the case is seriously undermined. "We would like to point out that those charged have been, and still are, adamant ... about denying any connection to the crime," the lawyers wrote. An official statement from the judiciary stated that Eid "is studying the memo" and will make his decision known soon.

For Atlas of Lebanon, drawing lines is politically delicate act
New edition has shebaa farms within territory
By Rym Ghazal -Daily Star staff
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: The first official Atlas of Lebanon has been released, loaded with highly detailed maps and elaborate data about the country and providing some reference for statistics-hungry citizens. One interesting thing to note, considering the focus of the national dialogue on Shebaa Farms, is that in this atlas the farms are drawn within Lebanese territory.
"The official maps for the past five years have Shebaa as Lebanese," said Mouin Hamza, secretary-general of the National Council for Scientific Research, which in collaboration with the Council for Development and Reconstruction took three years to complete the book."This project was launched in the hopes of structuring Lebanon's lands, using the latest geographical technologies and scientific methods," said Hamza. The LL 25,000 atlas is in French and includes over 60 pages of intricate data and colorful maps created with Remote Sensing and GIS technologies. The maps contain data on renewable natural resources and geological and environmental information. "It was a difficult task that needed a lot of coordination between the different municipalities, and there is a serious lack of efficient and accurate data, so we had to recheck several times before publishing any of the information," said Hamza.
The atlas also includes information on demographics, the number of residential homes and construction sites, transportation, education, pubic service and water distribution. An especially original feature is the sections providing analysis of the risks of natural disasters, desertification and pollution.
"We are planning to publish an English and Arabic version next year, it just happened that we were assisted by a French institute and most of the information provided was in French," said Hamza.
The atlas projects a population of about 5.5 million in Lebanon by the year 2030, with population centers of exceptional density occurring in Beirut and Tripoli. Another section lists the number of members per household from region to region, based on data collected in 1997. The highest rate of household occupancy that year was in Akkar, with an average of 5.9 per household, while at the other end of the spectrum were Jezzine (3.5 per household), Kesrouan (4), Beirut (4.1), and Metn (4.1).According to the atlas, the smallest river in Lebanon is "Nahr Beirut, 230 kilometers squared," while the largest is the "Litani River, 2140 kilometers squared." The atlas also includes a section of transportation statistics. In 2002, private vehicles accounted for 83 percent of the total transportation in Lebanon, according to the atlas, with pickup trucks accounting for 9 percent and taxis for 3 percent.
There are other interesting facts such as the number of people that enter and exit Beirut daily, broken down according to where the commuters come from. About 4,000 people commute to Beirut from Akkar, for example, while 15,000 come from Baabda, 60,000 from Chouf, and 262,000 from Metn.Some of the data has trivia appeal, such as this from 2003: "There are five commercial ports in Lebanon, and Beirut's airport capacity reached 16 million passengers per year."

Lavrov: UN to tackle Shebaa Farms issue
By Nada Bakri and Nafez Qawas -Daily Star staff
Thursday, March 09, 2006
BEIRUT: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said from the United Nations headquarters in New York Wednesday that the Security Council would meet in the near future to tackle the identity of the occupied Shebaa Farms. "I would certainly suggest that sometime down the road there will be a meeting on the Shebaa Farms. It might be helpful to diffuse the situation in Lebanon and tackle the activities of Hizbullah," the Russian official said.
Lavrov further revealed that Moscow would "be receiving the new Syrian foreign minister in Moscow next week. We will discuss with him the implementation of UN resolutions and will encourage the Syrians to continue their cooperation with the international investigation into [former Lebanese Premier Rafik] Hariri's murder."
Meanwhile, Lebanon's deeply divided political elite said they will resume their national dialogue conference Monday with increased determination, despite fears that disagreements over key issues might have ended the talks.
The abrupt decision to adjourn the talks is believed to have been made after participants failed to agree on Hizbullah's weapons and the Shebaa Farms.
Inflammatory comments by Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt were also believed to have caused the postponement.
The Chouf MP had renewed calls for the immediate departure from office of President Emile Lahoud, as well as the disarmament of Hizbullah's military wing.
But Jumblatt, who met Wednesday with United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan in New York, refused to be held responsible for the dialogue's suspension.
Jumblatt insisted he had only repeated opinions expressed "since the assassination attempt on Democratic Gathering MP Marwan Hamade" - the parliamentary bloc Jumblatt heads - on October 2004.
Lebanon's national dialogue, which kicked off last Thursday, was due to last for one week. However, Speaker Nabih Berri, who sponsored the talks, said the talks would be adjourned until Monday to allow participants to hold consultations with their respective parties and leaderships.
The national leaders said they would use the time-out to hold extensive consultations with other political parties and religious figures before reaching a final agreement.
Following a meeting of the Liberation and Development parliamentary bloc headed by Berri, MP Anwar Khalil said the speaker hoped Monday's session would bring an end to the political deadlock.
"The speaker described the general atmosphere of the talks as responsible, transparent and honest, and hoped participants will be able to reach positive decisions by Monday," Khalil said.
Berri also met with former president and Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel. Gemayel, who had earlier met with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir, said his party was holding talks with key figures to reach a unified stand by Monday.
"We've all come from different political backgrounds and we cannot overcome our differences with a magic wand. Therefore it is essential to hold talks and consultations to be able to unite our stances," Gemayel said.
Participants in the dialogue agreed during the first day of to follow up on the establishment of an international court into the Hariri assassination.
However, they failed to reach an agreement over UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which stipulates "free and democratic presidential elections" and the disarmament of all "Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias," in addition to Lebanese-Syrian relations.
Gemayel said the presidency will not be the first topic discussed because "priority is for other issues," but he hoped a solution to the presidency would be found by the end of the dialogue. Sources close to Lahoud said the president does not believe the country is as united in demanding his resignation, as some politicians claim.
The sources added that "Lahoud believes Hizbullah's and the Palestinian factions' arms and the Shebaa Farms are the most critical issues on the dialogue's agenda," adding the national role of the resistance should be respected and the Lebanese identity of Shebaa Farms should be established.
Jumblatt has repeatedly said the Farms are not Lebanese and are being used by Hizbullah as an alibi to keep their arms.
Information Minister Ghazi Aridi, who was filling in for Jumblatt during the talks, said he opposed the adjournment. However, he added that the break will provide time for further discussion that will push the dialogue forward.
Jumblatt is expected to participate in Monday's session.

Opposite pressures end national dialogue
By: Youssef Hourany 8/03/06
Pressures from Damascus, which fears exclusion, mount as Jumblatt from Washington joins Rice calling for Lahoud’s resignation and Hezbollah’s disarmament. Geagea says he’ll support any initiative by Patriarch Sfeir.
Beirut (AsiaNews) – Lebanon’s national dialogue conference is suspended but not cancelled. According to National Assembly Speaker Nabih Berri, “some of the participants said they want to consult their parties and leaderships before taking decisions, and hopefully on Monday they will announce their final decision”.
Influential daily L’Orient Le Jour reported instead that the decision to take time out stems from Hezbollah’s desire to have Jumblatt (who is currently in the US) in Beirut, and from “strong pressures from Syria”.
If Walid Jumblatt and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from Washington demand the implementation of UN Resolution 1559 on the disarmament of militias and US Vice President Dick Cheney warns Syria against interfering in Lebanese affairs, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad warns from Damascus that any national dialogue in Lebanon cannot reach its goals without Syria. Likewise Mr Assad reiterated his “full support for President Lahoud, who remains the only point of reference for all Lebanese, who are going through difficult moments.”
The Syrian President called on Arab countries not to let Lebanon fall into the hands of Israel and repeated that he was still interested in finding the truth about the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, “murdered by the enemies of Lebanon and Syria”. Assad spoke as he met Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos who began a visit to Syria today to clear up, according to well informed sources, some issues that still cloud relations between the European Union and the Middle Eastern country.
The organising committee of the Arab Parties Congress, which ended today its meeting in the Syrian capital, sent a letter to Arab leaders ahead of their annual summit scheduled to take place on March 18-30 in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum. In the letter, the committee urges Arab leaders to help Syria in its pro-Arab position resist international pressures and Israel’s plans and greed, and oppose UN Resolution 1559 which would marginalise Arabs.
President Assad’s statement, which came a few hours after Lebanon’s national dialogue conference was adjourned, was followed by a statement by General Michel Aoun who criticised Jumblatt. The Druze leader in his meeting with Secretary Rice said Hezbollah was a militia that should be disarmed and repeated his criticism of President Lahoud. He said the US backed wholeheartedly the March 14 movement which calls for the removal of the Lebanese president and the implementation of UN Resolution 1559, i.e. the disarmament of Hezbollah and Palestinian militias.
Samir Geagea, one of the 14 leaders attending the national dialogue conference, told AsiaNews, after it was adjourned, that “we were unable to achieve what we hoped for before the summit began”.
Geagea seems pessimistic about the conference’s chances of success and slammed Syria and pro-Syrian President Lahoud. The head of the Lebanese Forces said that “we must abide by the demands of the Lebanese people to remove President Lahoud from office and elect a new president to help us overcome this crisis”.
He said he was confident that Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir would be able to judge events. He also asserted his support for the March 14 movement and trust in any initiative the patriarch might undertake.

Massoud Idrissi: Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Monday Monrning 7/3/06He is no stranger to Lebanon, since he came a number of times when he was director-general of the Middle East/Africa department at the Iranian Foreign Ministry. His latest visit, “which was unforgettable”, took place on the eve of the liberation of South Lebanon from the Israeli occupation, in the company of Kamal Kharazi, then the Iranian foreign minister. “Lebanon”, he said, “is dear to the hearts of Iranians. Though small in its land area, it is great in its power of attraction and its outreach to the wider world. It is the ancestral home of civilizations and of dialogue between cultures, and it is a land which gives diplomats the opportunity for a unique, rich and fruitful experience. That is why it’s a great honor for me to be serving as an ambassador here”. As Iran enters the twenty-seventh year of the Islamic Revolution, symbol of freedom and independence, Ambassador Idrissi spoke of relations between our two countries and questions of current concern.
What is the nature of Iran’s relations with the Arab world in general, and with Lebanon in particular?
Iran’s relations with the Arab world are based on friendship, respect, understanding and mutual cooperation. They are founded on the principle of fraternity and good neighborhood. We are states facing the same dangers and risks and bound by the same fate and future. Thus, with the good intention of all, these relations are constantly improving, taking account of the interest of the nation, the region and the Arab people.
If there have been certain susceptibilities in these relations, we are determined, along with our Arab neighbors and especially those of the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others, even the Maghreb countries, to make these relations prevail and be reinforced, with mutual trust.
As for Lebanese-Iranian relations, their sources go back to history and civilization and they are fraternal, par excellence, on all levels: political, social and cultural. And we’re working to develop them even more in trade terms. In fact, this is one of the priorities of my government and of our welcoming and cultivated people.
What is Iran’s position on the alignment between Hezballah and the Free Patriotic Movement?
The declaration of the Islamic Republic of Iran to support Lebanon in order to attain its objectives is addressed to all Lebanon -- government, Resistance and people -- without any distinction of religious confession.
To this end, Iran has defined two constant principles: the national unity of the Lebanese and the protection of the Resistance, through which it supports all sides in Lebanon. We support any current or formation in Lebanon that approves of these two constants. We view with favor the accord concluded between Hezballah and the Free Patriotic Movement, which enjoys a strong political and popular base. This approach between the two sides is surely in Lebanon’s interest and will lead to understanding and national unity. We call on the other Lebanese groupings present at the dialogue to achieve a national understanding capable of rebuilding a free Lebanon, far from all tutelage or external interference.
Strengthening bilateral cooperation
What was the purpose of the visit to Lebanon of Iran’s foreign minister? Will his conversations lead to signature of cooperation agreements?
As I have said, Lebanese-Iranian relations are excellent, and this is reflected in the respective official visits and in the signing of bilateral agreements. And the visit of our Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, to Lebanon falls within this framework. The discussions revolved around several projects. Iran has expressed its total support for Lebanon at all levels.
There are several assistance programs for Lebanon in its phase of reconstruction and development, especially at the level of infrastructure, petroleum, electricity and other fields.
Iran has, for this purpose, all the possibilities required.
Minister Mottaki’s visit offered a privileged occasion for discussion of programs encompassing the whole of Lebanon, from the North to the Bekaa and from the South to Beirut.
The issue of the cartoons
Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, has accused Damascus and Teheran of having exploited the issue of the cartoons published in Denmark and elsewhere. How would you reply to this allegation?
Any assault on the beliefs of Muslim people and the things they hold dear is reason enough to impel them to defend their Prophet. We condemn and deplore these tendentious efforts by Zionists to foment these troubles in an attempt to sow discord between Christians and Muslims.
Our position on this matter is clear. We called for the holding of peaceable demonstrations by Muslims to protest against the cartoons. We ask the countries concerned with the publication of these pictures to deal with the matter responsibly and with full respect, to ban all attempts made under the pretext of freedom of expression to publish such material. I do not think that people who are affected by anger need instructions in order to take action.
The Syrian-Iranian cooperation pact has stirred apprehensions in the countries of the region. Can you reassure them by defining the objectives of this agreement?
The Syrian-Iranian cooperation pact is not new but goes back to the beginning of the Islamic Revolution. Syria is one of the most important confrontation and defense fronts facing the Zionist and American plans aimed at controlling the peoples of the region in order to destroy their power and their free decisions.
This pact is a direct answer to Israel, which is the only party that has any reason to fear from it. It is not aimed at any Arab or Muslim country. We consider the Arab states to be a single nation, and we hope to be able to reach a respectable level of cooperation and understanding with these states, in the image of our pact with Syria, because it is the only means of protection and defense in the face of the American and Zionist attacks we now confront.
Our confidence in the Lebanese people
The international community is calling for the disarmament of Hezballah and the Palestinian militias on Lebanese territory, and the Lebanese government is in favor of opening a dialogue on implementation of the Lebanese part of UN Resolution 1559 in order to end the Palestinian camps’ status as a “state within the state”, from which the Resistance is benefiting. What is your position in this regard?
Our position on Resolution 1559 is clear. Several Lebanese politicians have stated that the Resistance has never been a militia. The head of the Future Current coalition, Saad Hariri recently said that Israel is the origin of the Lebanese problem, not the weapons of the Resistance.
As long as the Israeli danger continues to threaten Lebanon, this fraternal country needs assistance to confront the Zionist attacks targeting its land and water. We support the Lebanese people in their decisions and we have total confidence in them and stand by their side.
The Iranian nuclear dossier has been transferred to the Security Council. Teheran was given a period of one month to arrange its case, a period that expires on March 6. What does Teheran intend to do in this regard? Will it join a denuclearization project of the Middle East that includes Israel?
The pressures on Iran are not new in regard to the nuclear dossier. They go back to the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, our position is clear and firm. We have a legal and constitutional right stipulated in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and we base ourselves on a national consensus. The Iranian people support the position of their government in affirming its legal right to possess nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. We do not fear the transfer of our nuclear dossier to the Security Council or even the threat of sanctions that can affect our economic sector.
In the event that such threats are applied, the West and the United States will be the only losers, not Iran. For at that moment, one could well imagine the price of oil rising to unprecedented heights once Iran ceased to supply the world market with it. The whole responsibility for that would lie with the United States, and the repercussions would affect the whole international community.
You speak of denuclearization. We’re in favor of that. Indeed, we were the first to support it even though our moves to develop nuclear energy are for purely peaceful purposes, without any relationship to atomic weapons. Our position on this is even firmer than it was in the past, and will not change because of the threat of sanctions or other pressures.
No problems with the IAEA
What is your position concerning the possibility of uranium enrichment on Russian territory?
At the start, this proposal was first accepted by the Islamic Republic as a basis for negotiations, subject to change. Later we requested guarantees, but in the light of later developments, we have seen that this proposal can no longer satisfy the legitimate rights of the Iranian people.
At the moment we have postponed negotiations on this subject to a later date, the more so since we have stopped the application of certain decisions that we imposed on ourselves, voluntarily, as a gesture of good faith to the international community.
We have resumed nuclear research through certain activities of a peaceful nature. We are ready to go further, such as the decision to pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if that treaty is an obstacle to our legally acquired rights. We are not afraid of threats.
From the start we did not take the American position into consideration because the Americans, as is their habit, act in accordance with double standards on this issue. They want to politicize it and put pressure on us in order to attain political objectives, seeking to dominate the region and exercise hegemony over it. They want us to renounce our principles, which safeguard the interests of peoples and their legal rights.
The Americans and Europeans know perfectly well our intentions and the transparency of our objectives, We have, nevertheless, agreed to go further in our negotiations to reassure the international community.
We have even invited the Americans to take part in our peaceful nuclear program. Europe, Russia and China are informed of this initiative, but some of them can’t confront American decisions, as one can see in certain international conflicts.
Are your relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) compromised after its board of governors voted to refer the issue of Iran’s nuclear effort to the UN Security Council?
Our relations with the IAEA are good and based on mutual comprehension. We used to fear that it would knuckle under to American pressure. If you have been able to follow the position of the agency and of its director, Mohammad El-Baradei, over the last few years, you would have seen the harmony and good understanding prevailing between us. As long as we have full confidence in the position of the IAEA, the nuclear issue can be treated with highly-appreciated degree of technical expertise, in conformity with the laws and accords concluded. We therefore have no problems for the future.

The national dialogue Optimism tempered with caution
Monday Morning 7/3/06: Reciting the Fatiha at the tomb of the martyred former Premier Rafik Hariri and his companions before the start of the dialogue’s third session
Parties from across Lebanon’s fractious political spectrum sat down for unprecedented talks last Thursday in the hope of finding unity.
Fourteen personalities, Christian and Muslim, met for the week-long roundtable session in the Parliament building, the first such meeting not held under any foreign tutelage or influence since 1975. There was a strong sense that barriers were being broken down between the various sides, whose stances had previously seemed so intractable.
The national dialogue, launched and chaired by Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri, brought the various players in the country’s political arena to the table in the hope of forging an until now elusive unity.
“The first session was positive and there was unanimous agreement on pursuing the international inquiry into the assassination [of former Premier Rafik Hariri] and setting up an international tribunal,” Berri said. “Participants accepted that the government should pursue this matter”.
The cabinet in session:
Murr creates a surprise
Bishops ask Baabda to deal with responsibilities “before God and history”
The conferees listening to the national anthem at the start of the first session
UN Security Council Resolution 1644, passed in December, authorized Lebanon to create a special tribunal for the murder of Hariri and 20 others in a February 2005 bombing in downtown Beirut.
Calls for the setting up of a tribunal with an “international character” in December to try those accused of responsibility for the assassination saw the government split, with ministers belonging to or affiliated with Hezballah and the Amal Movement voicing concern that the demand had been made in haste by the majority.
Dignitaries at the first dialogue session included, besides Berri, Prime Minister Fuad Saniora, former President Amin Gemayel, MP Walid Jumblatt, head of the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP); Hariri’s son and parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri; General Michel Aoun, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, general secretary of Hezballah; MPs Mohammad Safadi, Boutros Harb, Elias Skaff and Hagop Pakradounian; and Lebanese Forces leader Dr. Samir Geagea.
Publisher and MP Ghassan Tueni, whose MP son was murdered in a Beirut bombing last December, and MP Michel Murr, father-in-law of President Lahoud’s daughter, were also at the meeting.
The presence of a delegate representing the Syrian Social National Party, the Lebanese Baath Party Organization and the Popular Nasserist Organization was rejected by Hariri and Jumblatt. But MP Ossama Saad, head of the PNO, said he had decided not to attend the dialogue and that he had not been asked to stay away, as media reports suggested.
There was also a brief uncertainty about who would represent the Greek Orthodox community. Eventually it was decided that MP Michel Murr (father of Defense Minister Elias Murr) and Ghassan Tueni would represent the community, despite the objections of the Orthodox deputy speaker, Farid Makari.
Sources close to the conference said the conferees might discuss the issue of the Presidency and that of weapons held by Palestinians outside their camps. The issue of the Presidency was on the agenda of the second day of the conference.
The position of President Emile Lahoud has divided the country, with the main parliamentary alliance giving him until March 14 to step down and launching a petition to gather a million signatures of support.
But despite controlling Parliament, this bloc lacks the two-thirds majority required to secure Lahoud’s removal through constitutional means.
The president hit back at his critics in Parliament last week, charging that their campaign to oust him was inspired by foreign powers and an affront to the country’s sovereignty.
In an unprecedented open letter in the L’Orient-Le Jour newspaper, answering its editorialist Issa Goraieb’s open letter, Lahoud insisted that it was not his allies who were in breach of a 2004 UN Security Council resolution demanding respect for Lebanon’s independence, but his critics’ foreign backers.
“Today, the supposed majority in Parliament is trying, with the help of foreign powers allied to Israel, to divide the Lebanese people with the well-known goal of weakening Lebanon”, the president wrote.
“These supposed champions of our sovereignty... began by taking control of Parliament... then installed in the cabinet a majority of ministers in their pay ... and now they have launched a campaign of incitement and disinformation... in a bid to seize the sole institution they don’t control -- the Presidency”.
Lahoud again insisted that he would stay in office, arguing that giving in to foreign-backed pressure to step down would itself breach the demand in Security Council Resolution 1559 for Lebanese sovereignty to be respected.
“My conscience impels me, despite your appeals and attacks and... the wishes of the foreign powers that are manipulating you, to retain the Presidency which is a mission of service to the country.
“It is therefore the current president who embodies the demand in Resolution 1559 that you so often cite”.
Lahoud’s critics charge that a three-year extension to his term adopted in 2004 before the withdrawal of Syrian troops last April was illegitimate because it was approved under the influence of Damascus.
France, which governed Lebanon under a League of Nations mandate from 1920 to 1943, has boycotted the president ever since, and during a visit to Beirut last month US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice scheduled no meeting with him.
But Lahoud insisted that he was unfazed by the repeated rebuffs at the hands of Washington and Paris.
“In the current circumstances, on the contrary, it is a source of pride for a president ... who continues to hold his head high, despite being buffeted by all the internal and external forces that wish harm to Lebanon and its people”.
A wager won
The 14 leaders meeting at the Parliament House to launch the dialogue won their wager, which was to sit down at the same table and hold a discussion on the principal affairs of the nation in a tranquil and cordial atmosphere and on a rational basis far removed from the habitual polemic. It was seen as a telling riposte to allegations made in some quarters that Lebanon is ungovernable.
The atmosphere on the first day was one of careful optimism. A consensus was soon reached at the morning session on the issue of the assassination of Rafik Hariri, the question of an international tribunal and the enlargement of the inquiry commission. The parties present authorized the government to follow up the dossier.
In the afternoon there was an in-depth discussion of the matter of the Presidency. It was in this context that General Michel Aoun announced his bid for the Presidency by claiming support from both the Muslim and Christian sides.
“I have a good chance if the criterion of representivity is respected”, Aoun, 71, said in an interview to LBCI.
The legislative elections held in May and June 2005 “showed that I have a large Christian support base and a lot of sympathy from Muslims”, said the general.
But Aoun cannot count on the support of the parliamentary majority, which is led by Saad Hariri and Walid Jumblatt.
Aoun’s backing comes from the 21 MPs of his own bloc and from Hezballah and the Amal Movement, which hold 35 seats in the 128-member parliament.
Aoun headed a government when he was forced into exile after his defeat in a Lebanese-Syrian army offensive in October 1990. He only returned in May 2005, one month after Damascus ended its 29-year military deployment in Lebanon.
Now, the general says his conflict with Damascus is “closed” following the withdrawal of the last Syrian troops.
In mid-February, the alliance which controls Parliament and heads the governing coalition gave President Emile Lahoud until March 14 to step down.
But Lahoud, like Aoun a Maronite Christian, the community which traditionally holds the Presidency, has insisted on staying in office until the end of his term in 2007.
Aoun said the anti-Lahoud camp, which has pledged to work for the president’s ouster by peaceful means, would need his support.
“They cannot remove the head of state without an agreement with me and Hezballah”, he said, affirming that he had the most popular legitimacy and was most representative of the Christian community.
The general signed a political accord on February 6 with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, to the surprise of his rivals.
Following the end of the first session, Premier Saniora telephoned Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak to inform him of the “very positive” developments.
Observers suggested that the long meeting (seven hours) held between Nasrallah and Saad Hariri at the latter’s home might have done much to enable the two to “reach common denominators” and thus to enhance the possibility that the dialogue would be successful.
At a press conference after the opening session, Speaker Berri said, “I’ve been waiting for this round table for years. My dream was fulfilled today, at least in form. It remains to be seen if it will be fulfilled in substance”.
Jumblatt left the dialogue conference for France and the USA, where he would meet with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (whom he received at his home in Beirut during her visit last month), World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz and possibly other senior US and UN officials. He would also be meeting members of the Lebanese community and giving speeches to research groups. The PSP leader was accompanied by Minister Marwan Hamadé.
Jumblatt’s place at the conference would be taken by Information Minister Ghazi Aridi, a member of his parliamentary bloc.
The conference was expected to last as long as discussions were needed, sources indicated.
Foreign governments observing dialogue
The launch of the dialogue was welcomed by foreign states, and was being closely followed by Arab and foreign governments particularly concerned with Lebanese matters. The ambassador of an Arab country quoted in the Beirut press indicated that the conference would be the first test to see whether the Lebanese could settle great national questions for themselves. If they succeeded, there would be no further place for any kind of external supervision or tutelage. He believed that the task would not be an easy one and that there would have to be a number of sessions.
The important thing, he said, was understanding on common denominators. Such an understanding would prove to the international community that the Lebanese were honoring the commitment made by them to hold a dialogue on Resolution 1559. And agreement on common denominators would lighten the political atmosphere in the country.
UN chief Kofi Annan hailed the national dialogue and voiced hope it would contribute to political stability.
“The Secretary-General congratulates the Speaker of Parliament for this crucial and timely initiative and wishes it every success”, Annan’s spokesman Stephane Dujarric said in a statement.
The Maronite patriarch also welcomed the opening of the dialogue.
Cabinet session
In contrast to the previous week, when ministers opposed to President Emile Lahoud’s continuance in office boycotted a session of the Council of Ministers to be held at the presidential palace, most ministers were present at last week’s meeting, held at the headquarters of the Economic and Social Council in the Beirut city center. The only absentees were Trad Hamadé and Sami Haddad (who were abroad) and Joe Sarkis, who absented himself because of a decision of his party, the Lebanese Forces.
According to the report of the meeting given by Information Minister Ghazi Aridi, the session was marked by several interventions, the most important being that of Defense Minister Elias Murr (who is also President Lahoud’s son-in-law). Murr spoke of the situation, both political and economic, “which leaves much to be desired”, and asked the president to “assume his responsibilities and to take a decision of national significance, on the basis of his concern to preserve the dignity of his office and of his person”, and ending in these words: “I don’t belong to either [the forces of] March 8 or of March 14, but to all dates on which we remember the loss of martyrs”. And to President Lahoud: “Take a courageous decision, for you must not be the object of the nation’s opprobrium”.
Asked about the attitude of Hezballah and Amal ministers towards Murr’s speech, Aridi said “they made no comment, but there was a general atmosphere of accord”.
As part of extensive security precautions, the president entered the council building by a back door while the prime minister came in from the garage. Lahoud arrived in a convoy of 13 cars. Some 3,000 troops and police, including members of the Presidential Guard, were tasked with maintaining security.
Sources said all the ministers wanted to maintain calm during the session to ensure an “atmosphere of openness” ahead of the dialogue conference.
Meeting of Maronite bishops
The monthly meeting of the council of Maronite bishops also discussed the internal situation, “which has become untenable on all levels”. Following the meeting, which was chaired by the patriarch, Cardinal Nasrallah Sfeir, a communiqué was issued calling on President Lahoud “to assume his responsibilities before God and history”.
Then, deploring the schism on the political scene between those calling for the president’s departure and those seeking his maintenance in office to the end of his term in September 2007, the bishops said “this has had negative repercussions on state institutions and has prejudiced the interests of citizens”.
They stated that “the president alone is able to judged whether his continuance at Baabda Palace benefits the nation, or not, and therefore to assume his responsibility”.
At the same time the prelates appealed to the public “to show vigilance and wisdom amid a disquieting situation until matters are normalized”.
Polemic between Baabda and Koreytem
Preparations for the dialogue conference did not halt the acrimonious exchanges between the president and his detractors, particularly the ‘forces of March 14’.
The president’s reply to the editorial writer of the daily L’Orient-Le Jour had the consequence of relaunching the attacks on the head of the state, accused of “having distorted certain facts”.
Among the president’s other critics was Saad Hariri who, as he signed the petition calling for the president’s removal, insisted on continuing the anti-presidential campaign. “The Presidency of the Republic”, he said, “is very important, and it has become imperative to bring about a change in it, on the basis of the Taef Agreement. It is no longer permissible that the country should be led by an official who hinders the march of progress on the institutional level”. And he invited the largest number of citizens to sign the petition.
For his part, Cardinal Sfeir indicated that the rehabilitation of institutions had become a national duty, as he said in his Sunday sermon of February 26, stressing “the necessity of stopping attacks on countries which are providing us with generous support and assistance in every sphere”. This was taken as a reference to criticisms of President Jacques Chirac by sources close to the palace. “What is happening among us does not indicate that we are a developed nation, treating its problems with wisdom”.
General Michel Aoun again warned against taking to the streets to obtain the president’s departure. “This high office must continue to inspire respect”, he said. He also spoke of the need for new elections on the basis of the new election law being drafted by an ad hoc commission.

Sheikh Naïm Kassem: A civil war can occur only as the result of a political decision
Monday Morning 7/03/06
As the Lebanese await the results of the dialogue initiated by Speaker Nabih Berri, Sheikh Naïm Kassem, deputy general secretary of Hezballah, discusses his party’s position on issues in dispute. He considers the dialogue as “an occasion not to be missed since it is the only way of setting the country on the path to accord. If it were to fail, the internal situation would become more complex”. In his view, however, the factors that would make for civil strife “have not been brought together”. Commenting on the pretexts given by those who call for the removal of the president of the Republic, Sheikh Kassem thinks they are not justified and that President Lahoud is called to continue in office until the last day of his term.
Do you expect the dialogue conference to lead to positive results?
The mere fact that the conference is being held is in itself a positive element. It is a duty for all sides to take part in it and thus increase its chances of success. We have constantly called for a dialogue since getting together at a round table will help the parties reach common denominators. The dialogue must be carried on with confidence and hope, despite certain reckless statements and stances that produce the effect of oil on fire.
The issues to be discussed are so numerous that this first stage of the dialogue will not be enough to deal with them all. It could be the prelude to future meetings. However, I can’t affirm anything with total optimism since the chances of success and of failure are the same, especially if certain parties take part in it with the intention of imposing their particular vision of things. In that case the dialogue would stumble.
Dialogue must succeed
And if it failed? What then?
Failure is relative, and if it were to fail, that would affect the political stability and the social and economic recovery of the country.
How is it possible to reassure the Lebanese when certain political forces accuse each other of arming themselves? And what would happen to civil peace?
If some people brandish the menace of civil war, that would be the result of a political decision, not a deterioration of the situation on the ground. We must therefore warn against inflammatory and provocative statements to avoid such a conflict. That also supposes action aimed at preventing the transformation of the country into a field of confrontation to settle certain accounts.
According to information in our possession, no side is in favor of a civil war. We for our part will persevere in our initiative intended to defuse crises, whatever their nature may be. The Lebanese people are not ready for such crises and they do not want them.
To the extent that the Lebanese consolidate their union, they will foil any attempt by subversive elements to sow the seeds of discord.
Is there an escape hatch from the call of the “forces of the majority” for the removal of President Lahoud?
We haven’t discussed this question from that standpoint with anyone. We consider the pretexts given for such a call to be unjustified. We believe the president should complete his mandate.
Those who call for his departure base themselves on the supposed fact that he is implicated in the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri. But in fact the Mehlis report does not confirm such an implication.
If this call is motivated by the desire to reconsider certain legislation, President Lahoud can express his opinion in regard to all questions. What is happening is that the majority is rushing to take over the Executive, which is not admissible.
What do you think of the suggestion to cut short the presidential term?
This proposal corresponds to an American and French desire and to that of certain internal parties. When the United States and France busy themselves with plans to cut short the presidential term, they do so in the hope of placing such a gain in the framework of a program containing several objectives, such as disarming the Resistance and subjecting Lebanon to their authority, the same as Syria.
The Constitution lays down a procedure for the removal of a president. No one has the right to violate the basic law and impose his point of view on others.
The ‘forces of March 14’ in an awkward position
Is President Lahoud now in a difficult position, or is it the parliamentary majority?
People have the impression that it is the majority which finds itself in an awkward position, since it takes decisions, then retracts them; expresses its opposition to dialogue, then accepts it.
The March 14 ended when General Michel Aoun withdrew from it. Subsequently, playing the dual role of the state and the opposition, the “forces of March 14” have muddled the situation and they must bear responsibility for the stagnation affecting the country in all its productive sectors. But they reject that responsibility, which they cast on certain invisible intelligence service. And they have recently paralyzed the Council of Ministers, whose task is to manage the state’s business, not to immobilize it.
All this has troubled Arab governments, which have undertaken an initiative to normalize Lebanon’s relations with other fraternal countries, and this raises a few questions.
Aoun, a serious presidential contender
Do you still consider General Michel Aoun a serious presidential contender? What about other possible candidates for the presidential office?
In our view, General Aoun is a serious candidate and has the qualities required for the office. But the matter of the presidential election is not on the table now and we don’t want to express our opinions about it. The election is still a year and a half away.
Some say that Hezballah has given the Free Patriotic Movement, through the “joint work document”, what it did not give to its allies during the last legislative elections. Why? Is the document a matter of strategic or of tactical importance?
When we proclaimed the quadripartite alliance grouping the “Hezb”, the Future Current, the Amal Movement and the Progressive Socialist Party, we reached agreement on a series of political questions, notably the continuity of the Resistance, the pursuit and punishment of criminals, whoever they are, and the joining of efforts to bring about the recovery of Lebanon.
During the legislative elections, we contributed to the success of the Jumblattist list in the Baabda-Aley constituency, where the PSP now counts 10 members of Parliament. We gave and we received, and we helped to bring together the fronts of March 8 and March 14.
We subsequently noted that certain allies wanted to take the initiative in various operations and to drag us in their wake, which we could not tolerate. This provoked misunderstandings and divisions that led to a rupture. But since we have faith in dialogue, we made a commitment with General Aoun, who was cooperative. Despite the fact that our respective positions are somewhat separated, we succeeded in concluding an agreement because of the seriousness and determination that characterizes the mutual confidence which emanates not from sentiments but from firm stances. This dialogue has continued for three months, marked by intensive meetings.
We consider this joint document as an exploit, not an alliance. Nor does it have an annex or a secret clause. It can serve as a model for all Lebanese, whatever their positions.
Why is there no mention of the Taef Agreement in the joint work document? Can this omission be interpreted as a turning against the agreement?
Two or three days after the announcement of the document, Hezballah’s general secretary [Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah] affirmed that the document was a commitment to Taef. We agree with General Aoun on the fact that all action must be based on the laws and the Constitution entrenched by the Taef Agreement.
MP Walid Jumblatt, head of the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP), has said that the “Hezb” has not done enough to improve his relations with Damascus. Is the path between Moukhtara and Haret Hreik definitively cut?
Before the assassination of former Premier Hariri, the leadership of Hezballah worked to reconcile viewpoints between the Syrian leadership and Mr. Jumblatt, who had launched a diatribe against Syria from the Bristol Hotel. Subsequently circumstances have ceased to be favorable for new contacts.
Mr. Jumblatt cares little about reestablishing his relations with Damascus. He prefers to stick to his project and have his own discourse. He once asked us to protect him, but we don’t know how to deal with this request. We’re not responsible for what may happen to him, and we don’t know what Syria wants.
I believe that Mr. Jumblatt is targeting us in an attempt to paralyze us. This is linked not to his differences with Syria, but to his political options.
After denouncing UN Resolution 1559, Walid Jumblatt has expressed his support for a strict application of it. What is your comment?
That proves that he is engaged in a new political orientation. It’s clear that he is committed to the international community, of which America is the godfather, and which wants to apply 1559 and use Lebanon to attain to certain objectives in the region, to ease Israel’s position by annihilating the Resistance. Mr. Jumblatt publicly proclaims his political options and we were not surprised by his stand on 1559, whose objective is to strike at Hezballah, to facilitate the imposition of a foreign tutelage and to impose a blockade on Syria. Mr. Jumblatt calls for implementation of Resolution 1559, and we consider that it does not exist in its Lebanese provisions.
Whoever wants to have a dialogue with us on the basis of the fact that we are Lebanese who want to live together, is welcome; but whoever wants to have a dialogue on the basis of the application of a UN resolution, I think he is aborting the dialogue before it has begun.
Our dispute is a political one
PSP MPs say their dispute with Hezballah has less to do with the weapons of the Resistance than with its favorable stand towards the Syrian regime. How do you respond?
We consider that our relations with Damascus must be based on the Taef Agreement and must be those of equal to equal, that is, relations based on mutual respect. The Taef Agreement has become our fundamental law.
I stress that we do not admit that Lebanon should be used as a passageway, or as a base, for the hatching and launching of plots against Syria.
Is the overthrow of the Syrian regime still among the priorities of the Franco-American alliance?
All the signs detected more than two months ago, especially before the speech of President Bashar Assad at Damascus University, lead us to believe that there is an American decision to overthrow the regime.
But the US Administration has had to change tactics after it noted the solidity of the Syrian regime, internally, and therefore, the difficulty in overthrowing it. It has also noted the weakness of the Syrian opposition and its inability to act. Add to that the rallying of the Syrian people around the leadership, making any attack unfruitful, as has been the case in Iraq. In sum, the Americans have miscalculated and have had to fall back.
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has challenged the Americans to land troops on our coast to disarm the Resistance in accordance with Resolution 1559. Are we going to see a confrontation with the US forces?
In fact, the situation does not allow the Americans to undertake a new adventure after the one they’ve undertaken in Iraq. It’s not true that they have given us a period of grace since if they were able to implement 1559, they would have done it in accordance with their ideas, using military force.
Lebanon’s interest lies in the firmness of positions, and what the Resistance has accomplished does honor to it.
Hezballah is accused of having joined the Iranian-Syrian pact. Does this pact really exist, and what is its scope?
It signifies simply that the parties which have adhered to it are committed to support one another in good moments and bad. It provides for the signing of agreements of a political, military or other kind, if the need arises. But this has not happened; otherwise the public would have been informed of it.
The fact is that the United States is trying to bring about a restructuring of the region under the term “the new Middle East”. It is clear to the Americans that Iran and Syria are opposed to this. For its part, Hezballah does not share the views of America in regard to Israel and to Hamas, which surprised everyone by its success in the elections. So it’s Washington that talks of a Syro-Hezballah pact, so as to be able to identify those who oppose this pact.
We are not bound by any such agreement, and we would be honored if it saw the light one day. Hezballah is clear in its conduct as in its claims and objectives. It endures much in the interest of Lebanon’s unity and of the liberation of the territory. Its mottos and practices prove this.
The international probe
What is your reading of the international inquiry into the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, especially in regard to the witness unveil Mohammad Zouheir Siddik?
According to the two reports of Detlev Mehlis, the results were clear, in the sense that the inquiry was not able to implicate specific persons in the attack of February 14, 2005. The inquiry collapsed because of the testimony of Houssam Houssam and Mohammad Siddik. And the new head of the commission, Serge Brammertz, has taken the inquiry back to square one since it had become oriented in a political sense, which left gaps that held up the investigation. We hope Mr. Brammertz will be able to unveil the truth as soon as possible, and we hope the inquiry will not overstep the judicial and professional framework.
How does Hezballah see a solution to the impasse in which Lebanon is mired?
It is necessary, first of all, to ensure the success of the dialogue; dissociate the inquiry into the Hariri affair from the issue of relations with Syria; lead the inquiry to its end; establish a procedure on the basis of which relations with Damascus can be reestablished; put a stop to inflammatory statements, which should be replaced with a wise and calming discourse.
Finally, if we think that early elections are necessary and if a change of government can contribute to improving the political situation, it will be possible to reach a national consensus.
Head of the Zahlé parliamentary bloc Elie Skaff: ‘Yes to a responsible and transparent dialogue’

Interview with Elie Skaff, head of the Zahlé parliamentary bloc
Monday Morning 7.3.06: Elie Skaff, head of the Zahlé parliamentary bloc, was among the first in the legislature to join the Free Patriotic Movement “on the basis of shared options and constant principles”, he said. He hastened to deny rumors to the effect that his alignment with General Michel Aoun appeared to be weakening because of certain differences of opinion, stating that his relations with the general were those of “frankness and transparency”. The rumors were sparked by a visit he made to the family of the assassinated former prime minister, Rafik Hariri.
Explaining these rumors, MP Skaff said, “Certain politicians behave toward General Aoun as if he were the ally of Syria. Those who spread such stories were themselves once close to Syria and helped Damascus reinforce its tutelage over Lebanon. Suddenly, they have now turned against their ally and are outbidding each other to make people forget their submission to the tutelary regime.
“Naturally, it is possible, even desirable, that Lebanese-Syrian relations should be normalized, on the basis of the idea, so often stated by Speaker Nabih Berri, that “Lebanon is not governed from Damascus nor against Damascus”.
So why is General Aoun suspected of following the Syrian line?
Need we recall that he was among the first to combat the Syrian presence and to press for the enactment by the US Congress of the so-called “Syria Accountability and Lebanon Sovereignty Act” and the Lebanese aspects of UN Security Council Resolution 1559 demanding the withdrawal of Syrian troops and the disarming of Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias? How then can we make such an accusation against him, which has no foundation?
General Aoun follows a balanced policy in the sense that he combated Syria in Lebanon but refuses to combat it in Syria. He has, quite simply, worked from the beginning to recover the sovereignty, independence and free decision of Lebanon.
Subsequently he has advocated the establishment of normal relations with our neighbor, which can be seen as a wise policy, and we approve of it.
This has been our line of conduct over the years, since our country cannot live closed up on itself, without taking account of its history and its geographical position and the human links existing between the Lebanese and Syrian peoples.
I want to affirm that our relations with Damascus must be based on mutual respect, not on relationship of suzerain and vassal, which was the case for almost three decades.
Saudi-Egyptian mediation
What is your view of the Saudi-Egyptian mediation aimed at improving relations between Lebanon and Syria?
I approve of it, if it takes place in the framework of safeguarding national sovereignty and the ongoing probe into the assassination of former Prime Minister Hariri.
I think that Arab mediation is in our interest and, above all, our security. We should do whatever we can to ensure its success, the more so since the internal situation seems to be increasingly tense. That’s why we need a responsible and transparent dialogue in order to reach common denominators and to consolidate national unity on the basis of the Taef Agreement, especially in regard to the weapons of the Resistance, the international inquiry into the attack of February 14, 2005 and the presidential election.
Are you optimistic about the results of the dialogue?
The arms of the Resistance cannot and must not be broached in an emphatic way. I think the joint work document the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezballah have signed can serve as the basis of our search for a solution able to satisfy all sides.
What about the dialogue?
The discussions with Hezballah should be carried on in a positive spirit, not in an atmosphere of political spite.
A responsible and transparent dialogue can defuse the crisis, not least because the Lebanese do not accept the presence of irregular militias bearing arms.
In regard to the international probe, the Lebanese unanimously insist on knowing the truth about the assassination of the martyred [former] prime minister, Rafik Hariri. The Hezballah and the Amal Movement ministers have rejoined the cabinet meetings after the matter of the international tribunal was settled.
As for the Presidency, the campaign launched by the “forces of March 14” to depose President Emile Lahoud through the use of pressure in the street is very ill-advised.
President Lahoud can step down of his own accord, as he has always said, if he can be succeeded by General Aoun.
This assurance by President Lahoud will give the “forces of March 14” the chance to settle the problem by a consensus on the election as president of General Aoun, who possesses the particular qualities required for that high office. General Aoun’s election will normalize the situation, while recourse to the streets will lead only to anarchy and destruction.
Alliances based on national constants
How are your relations with General Aoun?
The general is a man of frankness not given to maneuvers. I too hate lying and dissembling. Our relationship has deepened even more since it is based on abiding principles. The general has a clear political platform that we support, while at the same time we remain masters of our own decisions.
How would you describe your relations with Saad Hariri?
They are good. But those who surround him are divided, and this sometimes leads to arbitrary decisions.

Hamas may not be Israel’s biggest problem
By: Paul Michaels/communications director for the Canada-Israel Committee.
amas’ victory in the recent Palestinian parliamentary elections has opened the door to increased Iranian intervention on Israel’s doorstep, according to Winnipeg Free Press columnist Sam Segev (“Rice finds defiance in the Mideast,” March 1).
Given Iran’s determination to pursue a nuclear weapons program in defiance of the international community, and given repeated declarations of its feverishly anti-Semitic president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to “wipe Israel off the map,” such increased Iranian involvement is seen by many analysts as dangerously destabilizing.
“According to Israeli intelligence sources,” Segev writes, Hamas’ “political” leader Khaled Meshal “has formed a ‘strategic alliance’ with Iran. In return for non-recognition of Israel and continued terrorism against the Jewish state, Iran will provide Hamas ‘unlimited’ financial and military assistance via Syria and Lebanon’s Hezbollah.” Segev also notes that Iran continues with Syria’s help to supply arms to Hezbollah and to “pro-Syrian Palestinian terrorist groups in South Lebanon’s refugee camps.”
Hamas’ election victory has emboldened Syria’s President Bashar Assad. In January, Ahmadinejad met in Damascus with Hamas leaders, including Meshal, pledging his support for Palestinian “resistance” (i.e. terrorist) groups.
Late last month, Meshal met again with Ahmadinejad in Tehran. Ahmadinejad, along with Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, promised to fund a Hamas-led Palestinian government in the event that the United States and the European Union cut off funds.
Citing an interview with Meshal published in the Feb. 28 issue of the London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat, Segev noted Meshal’s continual refusal to recognize Israel’s legitimacy and to disarm. The most Meshal is prepared to offer is a “long-term” ceasefire with Israel in return for Israel’s total withdrawal from the West Bank, along with Israel’s acceptance of the “right of return” of Palestinians to Israel – a non-starter for Israel.
Meshal’s rejectionist declaration came just days before he was scheduled to travel, as the head of a Hamas delegation, to Moscow to meet with high-ranking Russian officials who were trying to reassure the West of their confidence in being able to prevail upon Hamas to “moderate.”
As of this writing, the Hamas-Russian meeting is mere days away. Yet it would almost certainly defy everything Hamas officials have been saying to assume that Russia will have any success in moving the group to conform to the preconditions set out by the international Quartet (of which Russia is a member, along with the United States, the United Nations and the European Union) for negotiations with Hamas.
What Russia is really aiming at, many believe, is to develop its own influence in the Middle East against that of the United States at a time when U.S. power in the region seems to be faltering.
In the meantime, Iran’s ambitions continue to grow, not only with Syria and Hamas, but also in Iraq, where it reportedly continues to consolidate its influence in the Shiite-dominated south.
Segev observed that with Iraq “facing civil war and a possible disintegration into three separate ethnic entities” – Sunni, Kurd and Shiite – Iran was able to orchestrate the recent visit to Damascus of the radical Iraqi Shiite militia leader Nokteda al-Sadr. His mission? According to Segev, it was to lay “the grounds for a future Syrian-Iraqi rapprochement.”
In short, the rise of Hamas has occasioned or been accompanied by the strengthening of the Iranian-Syria-Hezbollah alliance and the forging of a possible new one, an Iranian-backed Iraqi-Syrian relationship.
Israel is confident it can deal with a Hamas-led Palestinian government. More troublesome is what’s developing elsewhere on its borders.






















 

Update 1: Today in History - March 8
Associated Press, 8.03.06
Today's Highlight in History:
On March 8, 1782, the Gnadenhutten massacre took place as some 90 Indians were slain by militiamen in Ohio in retaliation for raids carried out by other Indians.
On this date:
In 1702, England's Queen Anne ascended the throne upon the death of King William III.
In 1841, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., the "Great Dissenter," was born in Boston.
In 1854, U.S. Commodore Matthew C. Perry made his second landing in Japan; within a month, he concluded a treaty with the Japanese.
In 1874, the 13th president of the United States, Millard Fillmore, died in Buffalo, N.Y.
In 1917, Russia's "February Revolution" (so called because of the Old Style calendar being used by Russians at the time) began with rioting and strikes in St. Petersburg.
In 1917, the U.S. Senate voted to limit filibusters by adopting the cloture rule.
In 1930, the 27th president of the United States, William Howard Taft, died in Washington.
In 1942, Japanese forces captured Rangoon, Burma, during World War II.
In 1965, the United States landed about 3,500 Marines in South Vietnam.
In 1999, New York Yankees baseball star Joe DiMaggio died in Hollywood, Fla., at age 84.
Ten years ago: Wall Street plummeted in a major selloff triggered by seemingly good economic news - a drop in the nation's unemployment rate and the biggest jobs gain in more than a decade. (Investors apparently worried that a stronger economy would mean no more interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve.) Dr. Jack Kevorkian was acquitted of assisted suicide for helping two suffering patients kill themselves.
Five years ago: The Republican-controlled House voted for an across-the-board tax cut of nearly $1 trillion in the next decade, handing President Bush a major victory only 48 days into his term. Scott Waddle, the embattled commander of the Navy submarine that collided with a Japanese fishing vessel off Hawaii, offered a tearful apology to the families of some of the victims. Dame Ninette de Valois, founder of the Royal Ballet, died in London at age 102.
One year ago: President Bush said authoritarian rule in the Middle East had begun to ease, and he insisted anew that Syria had to end its nearly three-decade occupation of Lebanon. Hundreds of thousands jammed a central Beirut square, chanting support for Syria in a thundering show of strength by the militant group Hezbollah. Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov was killed in northern Chechnya during a raid by Russian forces.
Today's Birthdays: Actress Sue Ane Langdon is 70. Baseball player-turned-author Jim Bouton is 67. Actress Lynn Redgrave is 63. Actor-director Micky Dolenz is 61. Lyricist Carole Bayer Sager is 60. Pop singer Peggy March is 58. Baseball player Jim Rice is 53. Singer Gary Numan is 48. Actor Aidan Quinn is 47. Country musician Jimmy Dormire (Confederate Railroad) is 46. Actress Camryn Manheim is 45. Actor Leon is 43. Rock singer Shawn Mullins (The Thorns) is 38. Actress Andrea Parker is 37. Actor Boris Kodjoe is 33. Actor Freddie Prinze Jr. is 30. Actor James Van Der Beek is 29. Rhythm-and-blues singer Kameelah Williams (702) is 28. Rock singer Tom Chaplin (Keane) is 27.
Thought for Today: "In every person, even in such as appear most reckless, there is an inherent desire to attain balance." - Jakob Wassermann, German author (1873-1934).
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

Welsh Church Leaders to Visit Lebanon and Syria
Welsh leaders will visit Christians in Lebanon and Syria this month in a bid to build stronger ties between Christians in the region.
March 8 , 2006, 8:44 (UK)
Church leaders in Wales will head to Lebanon and Syria later in the month for a visit to build stronger relations between Christians in the region. A number of representatives of the main denominations in Wales, including the United Reformed Church and the Congregational Federation, will meet with members of the Middle East Council of Churches.
The team of delegates will also meet with Muslim leaders and politicians during their reconciliation-building trip.
The trip is being organised by Rev. Christopher Gillham, a Congregationalist and chairman of Churches Together in Wales (CYTÛN), with the aim of bringing about a greater understanding between the Welsh visitors and the host representatives of Lebanon and Syria. "I expect it to correct some of the stereotypical views of Syria as a repressive dictatorship and Lebanon as a chaotic place full of bandits and kidnappers,” said Rev. Gillham.
Welsh delegates will have the opportunity to learn about the faith and lives of Roman Catholic and Orthodox Middle Eastern Christians in Syria and Lebanon, while Syrian and Lebanese Christians will be equally eager to compare and contrast their own experiences of the Christian faith with their Welsh visitors. Churches Together in Wales is already planning a meeting of youth from the Middle East with those from the West while Syrian clerics are hoping to make a return visit to Wales at some point in the year. The visit by Welsh church leaders and representatives will take place from March 15 to 26.