Algebra, Language and the Broken Triangle
Abdullah Iskandar Al-Hayat - 12/11/06//

Between the first, last Monday, and the fourth yesterday, things were improving. And between the negative fourth and the fifth that is waiting for the return of Speaker Nabih Berry, head of Lebanon's consultations, from Tehran, there is still no agreement or mutual understanding.

During the week, people have talked about an improvement in the sessions of the Lebanese consultations between the ruling majority and the minority. Part of the minority is in the government and the rest is striving to enter it. This improvement is related to two endeavors. The first was made by MP Murr in order to repair the broken 'third side of the triangle'. The other has been carried on the wings of rumor that the third side of the triangle is being bartered in exchange for the International Tribunal.

Now for the details. MP Murr has strived to convince Hezbollah and its allies that 8.6 equals 9 on the one hand, and to convince the March 14 Forces that 8.6 makes just 8 on the other. In inventing this new algebraic rule, Murr relied on the geometry theory devised by Speaker Berry, which is based on the idea of making angles round, while keeping them angles, and turning circles into squares, while keeping them circles.

Nevertheless, the language of algebra and geometry has remained the strongest. No one, either among Hezbollah or the majority, is convinced that he will gain anything from these new mathematical and geometry rules. Everyone is trying to clinch a clear and undisputed result for themselves: 'we are the majority, and we want to maintain the highest number'; or, 'we want the government and an influential number in our program.'

The barter project has failed, and the causes are to be looked for in the fact that the minority has tried to sell its merchandise to the majority; in other words submitting to a previous government decision, so that other decisions would follow: 'we give you the International Tribunal without unveiling the details, and, in return, you give us the right to modify these details in order to make the assassination of PM Hariri really a criminal, even an individual, act!'

In both cases, algebra and playing on words have failed to offer a way for making the two parallel lines meet. These two lines have existed since the last elections, which established the March 8 concept. That is, to stick to the previous relations with Syria and Iran, to keep the Southern front open, and to make the State serve these two goals. At the same time, the elections also promoted the March 14 concept; that is, confining regional relations to bilateral ties, and closing the Southern front, so that the Lebanese State can stand on its feet. These two concepts first appeared in popular demonstrations. According to the first, the objective was to respond to the Syrian military withdrawal, and to announce their loyalty to the Syrian policy in Lebanon. This was followed by other demonstrations, which broke out immediately after the murder of PM Hariri. The demonstrators demanded to know the truth and called for the prosecution of those responsible for the crime. According to the second, popular demonstrations broke out in response to the March 8. In this case, the demonstrators said that the path of 'independence' is better paved and wider than the path of 'loyalty'.

The July war did not change the government's internal equation. The next demand was for national unity. However, the paradox is that those who demand it more vigorously than anyone else are some hard-line government representatives. They have adopted a hard-line stance because they want their ally, Michel Aoun, to join the government. The majority says it is ready to agree to this, provided it remains a majority. Nevertheless, Hezbollah has refused this condition because it wants to turn the majority into a minority. Now, here is a return to the play on words. Hezbollah wants the broken third side of the triangle in the government, but the impertinence of the slogan 'disrupting government work' has made it call this third side a surety. Speaker Berry has alleviated the intensity of the meaning of this word, because everyone is demanding guarantees. Therefore, he decided to call it the 'participating third side', while there are hardly any common denominators.

Mathematics, geometry and playing on words are no longer useful. The extended deadline set by Hezbollah has expired. Since there is a will to put an end to this situation, while time is running out and pressing, Hezbollah and Amal ministers have resigned from the government. It had been decided that these resignations were to be handed in yesterday while Berry was supposed to be on his way to Tehran to push the country into a strength test, the intensity of which the head of the consultations could have eased. This happened before the Council of Ministers discussed the International Tribunal system on Monday. The announcement by the two Shiite organizations that they will reveal what they are not convinced of has confirmed the majority's suspicions about the goals behind the demands for the broken third side of the triangle.