Lebanese Canadian Coordinating Council (LCCC)
Selected political
analysis and Reports addressing the Lebanese on going crisis
ِSeptember
22/2010
Content of the
compiled reports and analysis
*An Imminent Coup by
Hezbollah in Lebanon/By: Elias Bejjani
*Next Israel-Hezbollah war will be worse, says U.S.
analyst/By Amir Oren /Haaretz
*Fear and loathing in the Levant/By ZVI MAZEL /J.Post
*From One Sayyid to Worse!/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Alawsat
*Lebanon: A Personal Crisis/By Hussein Shobokshi/Asharq Alawsat
*The tragic irony of Hariri's
legacy/By Jamil K. Mroue
*The whiff of desperation/Now
Lebanon/
*Lebanon on verge of 'new
wave of insanity/'By Patrick Galey, Carol Rizk and Agence France Presse (AFP)
An
Imminent Coup by Hezbollah in Lebanon
By: Elias Bejjani*
September 18/2010
A Saudi advice has delayed the return of Lebanon's PM, Saad Al Hariri, from
Saudi Arabia to Beirut. Meanwhile, 3500 Hezbollah militiamen are secretly
deployed in the Eastern Christian region according to a report that was
published yesterday by the "Beirut Observer" web site. Hezbollah has reached its
final logistic preparations to execute an armed coup to take over all of Lebanon
by force. The web site attributed its information to well-informed sources in
the Saudi media. Below is a summary of the report with other related
information:
Well-informed Saudi sources have confirmed to the "Beirut Observer" that the
delay of Lebanon's PM return to Beirut came in response to advice by Saudi
officials. The Saudis are extremely concerned in regards to information became
available to them indicating that an imminent Hezbollah coup is in on the
horizon. The Saudis are fearful that Hezbollah’s threats are not mere political
rhetoric this time. The Iranian-armed militia has set all the needed logistic
preparations for the coup and is only waiting for the zero hour.
According to the report, Hezbollah's planned coup will take a camouflaged cover
of civilian protection this time. But the reality on the ground is that it will
not be different from Hezbollah's bloody and cruel invasion of Western Sunni
Beirut and Druze Mount Lebanon in May 2008. The coup will be initiated by
putting government officials under house arrest. This will include Lebanon's
PM, Saad Al Hariri, General prosecutor Said Mirza, Internal Security Forces
General Director General Ashraf Rifi as well as many other officials and
politicians. Sources said that Information Branch President Colonel Wesam Hassan
will be spared from house arrest in the early hours of the coup.
The report went on to conclude that at the present time the centre of attention
is a scheduled visit by a Saudi envoy to Damascus today and on the results of
his talks with Syrian officials. The Saudi mission to Syria will focus on the
current volatile situation in Lebanon, the avoidance of bloodshed, strife and
and the repetition of what happened on May 2008. The Saudis fear that the impact
of any military coup executed by Hezbollah in Lebanon will spread chaos over the
entire region.
Private sources from Beirut unveiled that Hezbollah has deployed 3500 of its
armed militia men along the Mediterranean coast in the Christian region from
Beirut northwards through the cities of Junieh, Tabarja and Batroun. These
bearded Hezbollah men are residing in chalets and apartments located in
Christian areas and on standby alert status in case of any political development
or security emergency that may require their armed intervention.
According to the report, a decision was taken by Hezbollah's leadership to
invade Christian regions loyal to the March 14 Coalition, and subdue them by
military force. Hezbollah's Leadership aim from such an invasion is to deliver a
bloody intimidation message to all Lebanese who oppose its hegemony over the
country. They want to prove on the ground that they have the upper hand, the
sole power and the authority all over the country.
The report attributed to the same sources that Hezbollah has bought real estate
in the Christian area of Muarab through Christians intermediaries loyal to
General Michel Aoun, and in the Christian town of Bikfaya through Syrian
Socialist National Party loyalists. In anticipation of potential fights with
parties, possession of this real estate allows Hezbollah militia to surround the
head of the Christian Lebanese Forces Party, Dr. Samir Geagea, and the Head of
the Kataeb Christian Party, Amin Gemayel.
Yesterday, Hezbollah issued a statement saying that Lebanon's Attorney General
Judge Said Mirza’s request to summon former General Security chief Jamil as-Sayyed
on Thursday was political par excellence: "We were surprised by the judiciary’s
decision which is political and oppressive to those who declare the truth,” the
statement said. It is worth mentioning that Hezbollah invaded West Beirut and
Mount Lebanon in May 2008 because the Lebanese Government decided to transfer
the Beirut airport security chief, a Hezbollah loyalist. The Lebanese are
fearful a replication of the same defiance scenario is imminent.
Hezbollah's statement comes after Sayyed said on Sunday that “[Prime Minister
Saad Hariri] should take a lie detector test to prove he did not support or fund
false witnesses in the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL),” in investigating the
2005 assassination of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri, and vowed to take his right “with
his own hands.” Sayyed was detained from 2005 to 2009 on suspicion of
involvement in the Rafik Hariri murder. In April 2009, the STL ordered his
release without charges due to lack of evidence.
Hezbollah has called for revoking the judiciary's decision to summon Sayyed for
questioning, adding that it should have summoned “those who were bragging that
they collaborated with Israel at a certain period of time.” Hezbollah and its
two evil of axis masters, Syria and Iran with all their Lebanese mercenary armed
allies are ratcheting up pressure aiming to discredit a UN-backed tribunal
expected to implicate Hezbollah and most likely Syria in the murder of
ex-premier Rafiq Hariri.
Below is the link for the Arabic report published
yesterday by the Beirut Observer web site
http://beirutobserver.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37340:hariri-&catid=39:features
*Elias Bejjani
*Canadian-Lebanese Human Rights activist, journalist and political
commentator
*Email
phoenicia@hotmail.com
*Web sites
http://www.10452lccc.com
&
http://www.clhrf.com
*Mailing phoenicia group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Phoenicia/.
Fear and
loathing in the Levant
By ZVI MAZEL /J.Post
09/21/2010 00:32
The war against the international tribunal set up to investigate the
assassination of Rafik Hariri is heating up.
Pro-Syrian forces in Lebanon are heating up their fight against the
international court set up in May 2007 by the UN Security Council to investigate
the assassination of former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri. They are threatening
violence and even to topple the government of Saad Hariri, son of the victim.
The court is due to issue preliminary indictments toward the end of the year.
Several Hizbullah militants have been investigated in recent months and the
group’s leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, is aware that his organization is the
prime suspect.
An article in Der Spiegel predicted as much last year on the basis of
information leaked by the court. If it happens, the Hizbullah leader who
professes to defend his country against Israel and against “Western interference
into Lebanese internal affairs” will find himself accused not only of having
committed a crime against his own country but also of being responsible for the
assassination of a number of Lebanese political figures and journalists opposed
to Syrian influence.
This would be a near fatal blow for the militant leader and would reopen the
public debate on the need to disarm his organization. One can reasonably fear
that a threatened Hizbullah would try to forcibly take over the country with the
help of Syria and Iran, leading to renewed civil war and plunging the Middle
East into a new cycle of violence with unpredictable outcome.
Nasrallah had cooperated at first with the court under the mistaken belief that
he could either mislead it or bring its inquiry to an end. However the Lebanese
government gave its full support to the court, with both its judicial and
security apparatus wholeheartedly cooperating. Nasrallah then tried pressure and
threats.
After the March 14 alliance, led by Saad Hariri, won the election in June last
year, intense pressure was brought to bear by Syria and Hizbullah, and the newly
elected leader capitulated and let Hizbullah and its allies – the Shi’ite party
Amal and Michel Aoun’s Christian party – join his coalition and his government.
This was the first step in “taming” Hariri, who soon proved himself a spineless
politician.
Threats and fear of fomenting unrest in Beirut led him to go to Damascus where
he publicly embraced Bashar Assad – widely suspected of having ordered his
father’s assassination – before declaring that good relations with Syria were
essential for Lebanon.
He has since visited Damascus three times and hosted the Syrian president on a
state visit to Beirut – Assad’s first since he succeeded his father Hafez in
2000 (excluding his participation in the 2002 Arab summit there). Lebanese
delegations were sent to Damascus to renew a number of so-called cooperation
agreements, some of which subordinated Lebanese interests to decisions taken by
Syria.
Lebanon is expected to host Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad next month,
putting the country even more firmly in the “axis of evil.”
Hariri thus betrayed the March 14 coalition which elected him. The coalition
rose out of the mass demonstration held on March 14, 2005, a month after his
father’s assassination, and which saw Christian, Sunni and Druse parties united
in their demand to find the murderers and have them brought to justice as well
as having Syrian forces thrown out of Lebanon.
The coalition had suffered a first blow when, a year and a half ago, even before
the parliamentary elections, Druse leader Walid Jumblatt announced that he was
leaving it since, he said, Syria, having withdrawn its forces from Lebanon
following Security Council Resolution 1559 (which had been one of the results of
the mass March demonstration), was no longer the enemy of his country. Jumblatt,
who had once been Syria’s and Hizbullah’s most vocal opponent, changed his tune
after his small militia was defeated by Hizbullah, which took over west Beirut
in May 2008.
At the end of July, the Lebanese president was “invited” to participate in a
summit meeting held in Damascus with Assad and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia had led a aggressive anti-Syrian policy following the assassination
of Rafik Hariri, a close friend of the king, who also held Saudi citizenship.
However the Saudis later changed course in the belief that accommodation with
Syria would somehow neutralize that country and facilitate holding elections in
Lebanon.
The summit held on July 30 was intended to do the impossible: find a way out for
Hizbullah by diverting the impending decision of the court away from it without
attacking the court itself. No solution having been found, Nasrallah made the
startling announcement that he had “proof” of Israel’s involvement in the
assassination. His so-called proof did not convince anyone, but the Lebanese
government was made to agree to forward it to the court, which in turn said it
would be thoroughly checked. This could perhaps delay the expected indictments
by a few weeks, but not change the course of the investigation.
Syria and Hizbullah were left with no choice but to ratchet up their pressure
and their threats against Hariri. In an inflammatory speech in August, Nasrallah
declared that the court had been deceived by “false witnesses” and demanded that
the Lebanese government investigate. He also accused the court of having
implemented “an Israeli project intended to provoke civil war in Lebanon.” He
added that he had nothing to do with the court and that the Lebanese government
had to put an end to the activities of the court because it was going in the
wrong direction.
This was adding fuel to the already tense situation in Lebanon. Representatives
of the Christian parties and of Hariri’s own party angrily rejected Nasrallah’s
affirmations. But Hariri himself, caught between Hizbullah/Syria and his own
allies of the March 14 movement as well as a majority of the country’s citizens,
first said that Syria was an important ally before adding that he would not
renounce his principles and that the court should be given all the time it
needed to reach the right conclusions based on the evidence it had. Then he
asked the justice minister to investigate Hizbullah’s complaints to see whether
false witnesses did appear before the court and subvert the inquiry.
The false witnesses Nasrallah referred to is an episode which took place at the
beginning of the investigation. A Syrian military officer, Muhammad Zohair al-Sadik,
testified before the international commission of inquiry, which preceded the
creation of the international court, that in the course of his duties in the
Syrian security services he had taken part in a meeting during which the Hariri
assassination was planned, and confirmed that “high-ranking individuals” in
Syria and in Lebanon were involved.
Shortly after giving his testimony, he recanted and fled to France, where he was
arrested at the request of the Lebanese Justice Ministry. France refused to
extradite him since the Lebanese government had failed to give assurances he
would not be executed.
He was freed in February 2006, disappeared, was rearrested, this time in the
United Arab Emirates, where he was accused of having entered with a fake
passport and sentenced to a short period of imprisonment.
He then disappeared again and no one knows where he is. It is highly probable
that he changed his testimony because of threats by Syria and/or Hizbullah and
subsequently decided to flee.
The international court, not being able to summon him again in 2009, had no
choice but to declare that his testimony was unreliable and to release the four
Lebanese security officials arrested in 2006 following that testimony. The four
were known collaborators of Syria and the assassination could not have been
planned and carried out without their help. Highest ranking of the four was Gen.
Jamal al-Sayed, who was head of the General Security Service at the time; he had
previously been head of army intelligence. He was generally held to be Syria’s
best agent in Lebanon.
MOST, IF not all, Lebanese know that Syria, Hizbullah and the heads of Lebanese
intelligence agencies were involved in the Hariri assassination and that false
witnesses are a pure invention of Nasrallah.
However, his public threats led to increased tension and the very real fear that
the organization might use violent means and even provoke a civil war. At the
beginning of September Syria added to the pressure by summoning Hariri to
Damascus. In an interview given to the Saudi daily Asharq al-Awsat upon his
return, Hariri said that the international court had been deceived, and this had
led to a deterioration of relations between Lebanon and Syria. In other words,
he was clearing Assad of having contributed to his father’s assassination.
In Lebanon this led to a general outcry. Some of Hariri’s allies did try to
explain that it was not what he meant, but others in the Christian parties, such
as Sami Gemayel, son of former president Amin Gemayel, vehemently objected. An
incensed Nasrallah threatened to “crucify” the Christian leader in the public
square. For once he was roundly criticized by representatives of all Lebanese
communities.
But this did not deter Hizbullah from increasing the pressure. The organization
found fault with Hariri’s declaration. It was not enough to say that the court
had been deceived, because it fell short of an apology. Without an apology to
Syria accompanied by a thorough change of policy, there would be no way to build
a united and functioning country.
Explicit threats followed. Gen. Jamal al-Sayed was sent for by Assad and on his
return from Damascus on September 12 violently attacked Hariri. Because of his
baseless accusations against Syria, he said, the man responsible for Rafik
Hariri’s assassination was not arrested and went on killing people during 2005-
2007. He called on the attorney-general and on the Lebanese judges in charge of
the investigation who cooperated with the international court to explain their
actions, adding that the prime minister must set up a commission of inquiry to
investigate the web of lies; otherwise, he said, “I swear on my honor that I
will get it from you by force.”
This was an open threat to the prime minister, and the attorney-general issued a
summons calling on Sayed to come and explain himself. Hizbullah immediately
demanded that the summons be rescinded. Hizbullah’s opposition to a judicial
procedure was considered as an attack on state institutions and a member of
parliament from the coalition said it was no less than threatening a coup d’etat.
ADDING TO THIS tense atmosphere, Hizbullah’s ally, Christian leader Michel Aoun,
launched another attack: What was happening in Lebanon, he said, was not the
result of policy but of mafia-type relations from top to bottom, with the media
distorting the facts. He called for civil disobedience toward security services
which did not act according to the law. He was referring to the arrest, a few
weeks earlier, of his friend and protégé retired general Fayz Karam, who had
been accused of collaborating with Israel. The man is innocent, he said. There
is absolutely no proof of his guilt, and the media are simply distorting the
facts.
At that stage President Michel Suleiman decided to enter the political arena. He
issued a statement on September 16 saying that this confrontation had gone too
far and called for appeasement; all parties should stop threatening and
attacking public institutions and the law for the sake of Lebanon. Otherwise
they would all suffer.
Lebanon is today in a state of shock. The fragile equilibrium between all
political forces is no more. Jumblatt’s Druse party has aligned itself openly
with Hizbullah and its allies; its spokesmen attack the government.
In Hariri’s Sunni party, El Moustakbal (the future), unhappy militants vainly
try to explain what their leader is doing, repeating that all he wants is to
keep the country united and that he is convinced that Lebanon cannot afford to
be at odds with Syria. Christian parties in the coalition went on the offensive
against Hizbullah and Sayed. Somehow the office of the March 14 coalition issued
a communiqué to the effect it was still supporting the work of the international
court and convinced that it would find the way to the truth concerning the
assassination of Rafik Hariri, but the coalition is disintegrating.
Hizbullah maintains its pressure. Muhammad Kamati, one of its leaders, declared
that the continued stability of Lebanon depended on the resolution of the case
of the “false testimonies” on which rested the accusations against Hizbullah.
Only when this was done could the country turn a new leaf and a new era begin.
What is happening today is almost impossible to comprehend. Syria and Hizbullah
– with the support of Iran – are determined to act openly to destroy the
legitimacy of the international court created by the Security Council. They do
this through intense pressure and open threats against the head of government.
Their goal is to force him to turn to the UN and/or the great powers and declare
that the court has been deceived and that after four years of investigation,
there is no longer any point in going on.
Another option would be for the court itself to decide that it can’t get to the
truth and therefore put an end to its activities.
What is beyond doubt is that both Hizbullah and Syria will do all they can to
prevent the court from fulfilling its mandate. If the court does not desist one
way or another, fighting will probably erupt in Lebanon.
The UN and the West look on, seemingly powerless as usual. As to Israel, a
Syrian/Hizbullah victory over the international court and a greater dominance of
Damascus over Beirut would mean that its northern neighbor is now firmly
anchored in the axis of evil. It would dangerously increase the risk of another
conflagration.
The writer is a former ambassador to Romania, Egypt and Sweden and a fellow at
the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
Next
Israel-Hezbollah war will be worse, says U.S. analyst
21.09.10
Research published by Washington Institute for Near East Policy says future
Israel-Hezbollah war would likely draw in Iran and cover much of Lebanon, Israel
and probably Syria.
By Amir Oren /Haaretz
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/next-israel-hezbollah-war-will-be-worse-says-u-s-analyst-1.314880
In its next war against Hezbollah, the IDF's Northern Command would use the
"Lebanon Corps" and five divisions - the 162nd, 36th, 98th, 366th and 319th,
according to U.S. intelligence veteran Jeffrey White in research published last
week by the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
According to White, if another Israel-Hezbollah war breaks out it will not
resemble the war of the summer of 2006, but will cover much of Lebanon and
Israel, and probably also Syria, and is likely to also draw in Iran, involve
major military operations, cause significant casualties among combatants and
civilians, and destroy infrastructure.
A policeman at the site of a Hezbollah rocket strike Nahariya during the Second
Lebanon War in 2006
Notwithstanding diplomatic efforts, success in the war will be decided on the
battlefield, and White believes Israel is much better prepared for the next
round than it was in 2006.
White says that the main aim of Israel in a war would be to impose a fundamental
change in the military equilibrium and defeat Hezbollah, although not a "final
victory." At the center of the Israeli military strategy will be combined arms
operations, land-air-sea, with the aim of quickly destroying Hezbollah's rocket
and missile arsenals and the group's land forces in southern Lebanon, and
seriously disrupting its command and control centers by hitting its
infrastructure throughout Lebanon.
Israel will seek to prevent the war from expanding to involve Syria, with
threats, mobilizing reserves, moving forces and "flexing muscles," but will not
hesitate to attack Syrian forces, infrastructure and Iranian elements that will
come to Hezbollah's assistance.
White says that Israel will seek to deter Iran from directly attacking its
territory through warnings and preparing strategic attack elements - airborne,
missiles and naval units.
Hezbollah's plan will be to fire volleys of missiles and rockets against
Israel's homefront in an effort to strike at the IDF forces moving toward
Lebanon, in the hope of causing massive casualties. The Syrian air force will
try to prevent Israeli fighters and reconnaissance aircraft from crossing
through Syrian airspace, and possibly try to intercept them over Lebanon, in
view of the proximity of the Syrian capital to the area of the fighting.
If Syria finds itself involved directly in the fighting, its main efforts will
be to preserve the Assad regime in Damascus, with less emphasis on helping
Hezbollah in Lebanon and its ability to strike at Israel, or restoring Syria's
military presence in Lebanon and defeating Israel in order to restore the Golan
Heights to its control.
Iran's reaction will begin with the flow of arms to Hezbollah and Syria, and
Iran will step up the presence of advisers, technicians and light combat forces,
aimed at carrying out attacks against Israeli targets, increasing tension in the
region (with hostile actions in the Strait of Hormuz ), and possibly launching
missiles against Israel.
There is no certainty that Hamas will join the fighting, especially because
Israel may use the opportunity to bring about the collapse of its hold in the
Gaza Strip, he added.
White says that in his assessment, the IDF will occupy parts - possibly
significant portions - of Lebanon within weeks, and possibly all the Gaza Strip.
He says that it will be the most serious war Israel has been involved in since
1973, and Israel must emerge victorious.
If Israel is determined in its actions, and willing to pay the price in
casualties and damage incurred, it will succeed militarily, break the military
power of Hezbollah and weaken it politically, White says. The Syrian regime will
be weakened, and Iran's activity in the region will be contained because of the
downfall of its allies. If Iran does not assist its allies, it will also lose
much of its influence.
Hamas, if it becomes involved directly in the war, will lose its military power
in the Gaza strip and at least some of its political power.
The former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst says the U.S. should not rush to
contain Israel, but give the IDF the time and space necessary to complete its
operations against Hezbollah and Syria.
White says that the U.S. role will be to deter Iran from becoming involved in
support of Lebanon-Syria or in the Persian Gulf.
From One Sayyid to Worse!
20/09/2010
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Alawsat
A witness to the political thuggery in Beirut today, led by former Major General
Jamil Al-Sayyed and Hezbollah, would truly realize the level to which Lebanon
has now sunk. We now see a former security man making physical threats, and we
also see Hezbollah, believed by some to have seized the moment of confusion
amongst the ranks of the March 14th Alliance- after Saad Hariri’s created a
media storm via our paper, when he spoke with apologetic language towards Syria-
to revel that its position is much more dangerous then previously thought.
Hezbollah did not take Hariri’s statements in a positive manner, regardless of
its position towards Syria. It is clear that the party lost its mind, after
Hariri’s interview. Here, the question is: Does Hezbollah think that Hariri was
in a moment of weakness, or do they feel that rapprochement between ‘March 14th’
and Damascus would be a potential danger for them?
The course of events, until now, suggest that Hezbollah is targeting Lebanese
Sunnis overall, by targeting their leader. They also seek to dishonor the memory
of Hariri’s father by demanding the abolition of the International Tribunal.
According to some information, Hezbollah is preparing for this through the
recruitment of Sunni mercenaries, just as Iran has done with Al-Qaeda in many
situations. They will take up arms on behalf of the party at the crucial moment,
although not in a repeat of the May 7th coup. Today, Hezbollah threatens to take
the whole of Lebanon as its hostage, unless they respond to its demands, and the
relatives of Rafik Hariri drop the International Tribunal. Hezbollah MP Hassan
Fadlallah has threatened “civil strife on a level perhaps not witnessed in
Lebanon before”.
All this helps us understand why Hezbollah publicly provided protection for
Major General Jamil Al-Sayyed upon arrival at Beirut Airport, where Al-Sayyed
made a statement to the world and in particular the ‘Sunni Community',
threatening to take to the streets. We do not know what street Al-Sayyed
threatens to descend upon, more than the regression displayed in his statement.
For if these remarks which displayed his ethics weren't from the street then I
don't know what is.
Interestingly, at the time when Director General of the Lebanese Security
Forces, Major General Ashraf Rifi said to Jamil Al-Sayyed: “prison for you and
those like who, and the murderers who are protected”, we find that Hezbollah is
welcoming Al-Sayyed in the airport VIP lounge, which is intended for
international leaders and delegations. Hezbollah even threatened that “any
unjust hands which attack Major General Al-Sayyed will be cut off!”
Another point of interest is that Major General Jamil Al-Sayyed was considered
to succeed Nabih Berri as Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament. If this had
happened, the Lebanese would have erected a gold statue of Berri, under the
logic of "my merits won't be appreciated until you asses my successor", but
thank God this did not happen.
So we can say, like the saying ‘from bad to worse’, Lebanon has today gone from
one Sayyid [Nasrallah], to another [Jamil Al-Sayyed], and the political
consequences are no better!
Lebanon: A Personal Crisis
20/09/2010
By Hussein Shobokshi/Asharq Alawsat
The Lebanese scene is too volatile, tense and changeable to avoid the headlines
and front pages. Now, a new chapter of the age-old Lebanese internal struggle
has begun (although there is nothing new in this). Secretary General of
Hezbollah, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, has delivered a speech of threat, warning
and intimidation against those who had opposed him, and supported the
intervention of the International Tribunal. Furthermore, General Michel Aoun has
been lashing out at official security bodies in Lebanon's government, for
interrogating one of his senior aides, and chief party member, on charges of
conspiracy and espionage on behalf of Israel. Note that the accused confessed to
the crime immediately after his arrest.
Moreover, former Head of General Security Major General Jamil al-Sayyid has
threatened to hold Saad Hariri and his government accountable “with his own
hands”, in response to a series of irresponsible statements, speeches and
comments, which aimed to ‘stir trouble in the war-torn and sedition-plagued
country’.
What really amazed me about the statements of these three men was that they
seemingly advocated blocking the International Tribunal and its intervention.
However, in reality, these statements were merely designed to ‘bury’ the Future
Movement, and paralyze the current government, by denying it the elements,
efficiency and instruments of a successful administrative body.
Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah felt that indicators given by the International Tribunal
strongly indicated a condemnation of some members of Hezbollah. This is quite
apparent from media leakages, and the political statements being made.
Nasrallah's sense of embitterment toward the Lebanese government, and its Prime
Minister, has increased on the assumption that Saad Hariri is the one
responsible for this escalation [of condemnations].
Being the blood guardian of his late father, it is thought that Saad Hariri
could waive the right of criminal investigation to save the country from
sedition. However, this is a clearly naive understanding of the entire affair
because the functioning of the International Tribunal is now in the hands of the
Security Council, rather than those personally linked to the case under
investigation. Some Lebanese parties have displayed unreasonable obstinacy in
conceiving this fundamental point.
As for General Michel Aoun, time is running out, and the dream of becoming
President and residing in Baabda Palace now seems distant. This has added
agitation and anxiety to his words and decisions. Of course, the implication of
one of his key aides in an espionage case, on behalf of Israel, (amidst Aoun's
alliance with Lebanon's primary symbol of resistance, in Hezbollah) embarrasses
and implicates him politically.
These recent developments come amid increasing popular and international
sympathy for the role played by President Michel Suleiman, and a respect for his
orientations and rational views.
As for Jamil al-Sayyid, who was quietly preparing himself to succeed Nabih Berri
as the next Speaker of the Parliament of Lebanon, thus, crowning his long
security career and allegiance to a certain political trend with a high-profile
office, it appears that his ambitions have been sidetracked amidst the security
predicament and the accusations lodged at him over the assassination of former
Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. All these incidents confirm that Lebanon's
primary issue [to be concerned with] is the erosion of state institutions and
the dominance of personal interests over political goals. This distorted concept
is the reason for the mixed political priorities in Lebanon's fragile and
delicate composition.
Political leaders in Lebanon are ‘overdrawn’ in terms of popularity, and lost
much of their status with the public. They have become more like clowns in a
political circus, whose movements change according to a specified day of the
week.
The volume of investment in Lebanon has gone down whereas the rate of emigration
has once again risen. An obvious and dangerous political stalemate has come into
existence and the feeling of rancour among fellow rivals has deepened, in a
clear fashion. All this means that the intervention of foreign parties into the
internal affairs of Lebanon will be a continuous and acceptable practice because
the Lebanese people have allowed this, and have become accustomed to it. These
interventions have now become part of their political identity and furthermore,
a lifeline.
The political agenda of Lebanon's leaders directly contradicts and collides with
the national priorities and general interests of the country. This, in itself,
is a reason as to why the Lebanese crises will continue. Furthermore, these
crises will never be solved by those who created them in the first place.
The tragic irony of Hariri's legacy
By Jamil K. Mroue
Publisher and editor in chief
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Daily Star/The sound and fury rippling out from Jamil Sayyed’s accusations has
morphed the Lebanese political stage into a theater of the absurd.
So many of the actors in the political arena have cloaked themselves in
something less than glory with their competing claims of conspiracies,
outlandish extortion and malfeasance in the high offices of the state. One finds
it hard to decide whether it would be more absurd if these allegations turned
out to be true or if public figures had actually been capable of inventing such
twisted fictions and then flogging them before the eyes of the world as the
unvarnished truth.
The cognitive dissonance stems from the fact that all these very real, fevered
emotions and dark threats are set in a foundation of utter conjecture. The
Special Tribunal for Lebanon has not yet even indicted anyone in the killing of
Rafik Hariri, much less convicted anyone in a credible trial.
Lebanon’s politicians, meanwhile, are building a monument of insinuation. Would
it be too impolite of us to ask for some evidence for some – indeed, for any –
of the allegations going back and forth between the players?
Perhaps even worse then fighting over mere conjecture, the country’s politicians
are creating the consequences of the indictment before the court takes any
action. Broad swathes of the public space are deteriorating over pure hearsay.
As usual, it is not the politicians who are suffering the fallout from their
absurd act, but rather the people – those who see any attempt at enterprise here
thwarted by constant and groundless uncertainty; the tide of emigration has not
yet begun to ebb, as the Lebanese continue to scatter around the globe to toil
away from their homeland.
The state, too, is suffering from this latest saga – if we can even grant that
there is a state to speak of. Alas, the state today is in worse shape than
Downtown Beirut after the Civil War.
Beyond the current – and fleeting, we hope – display of absurdity, Lebanon is
enduring a tragedy of irony. While Rafik Hariri was not a flawless man, he was
striving to create the institutions of a functioning state; his clear message to
all was to rebuild the country. The tragic irony is that the legacy of Rafik
Hariri – in the form of the investigation of his assassination – might well be
disfigured into the destruction of the state that he worked hard to reconstruct.
Every actor on this stage declares his innocence in Hariri’s killing; if none of
them is the culprit, then they all – and his son, as well – would best honor his
memory by dedicating themselves to help build a Lebanese state.
**Jamil K. Mroue, Editor-in-Chief of THE DAILY STAR, can be reached at
jamil.mroue@dailystar.com.lb
The whiff of
desperation
September 20, 2010
Now Lebanon/Former head of the General Security Jamil as-Sayyed speaks at the
airport upon his return from Paris on Saturday. (AFP photo/Anwar Amro)
The return of the disgraced former head of General Security Jamil as-Sayyed from
Paris not only summed up the mafia tactics his backers in Hezbollah feel they
can employ with impunity to kill off the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, it also
reeked of desperation.
Short of breaking out the weapons, it appears that the best Hezbollah can do to
the court created to bring to justice the killers of Rafik Hariri and other
subsequent victims of political terror, is use a man whom the party would not
back as a parliamentary candidate in 2009, and the increasingly eccentric, not
to mention erratic, Michel Aoun.
If we are to believe the media accounts of what happened, Sayyed, who was
detained for four years on suspicion of being an accomplice to the Hariri
murder, was met at the steps of the aircraft by Hezbollah security men, who let
him give an unofficial press conference at the VIP lounge during which he
attacked Prime Minister Saad Hariri, State Prosecutor Said Mirza, security chief
Major General Ashraf Rifi and Detlev Mehlis, former head of the UN investigation
into the Hariri assassination, before whisking him off to his home in Jnah.
We do not know if Sayyed was processed by immigration, but this detail pales
into insignificance when compared to the breathtaking arrogance of a party that
feels it can bypass airport security to pick up its latest poster boy. Surely
someone should lose his job for such a stunt.
Perhaps General Rifi’s subsequent impassioned response to Sayyed lent too much
dignity to the latter’s spleen venting, but the sentiment will have been felt by
all Lebanese who fear that the gains of 2005 are slipping away. Rifi, a public
official, defended the offices of the state and dozens who have died at the
hands of those who would undermine them. More importantly, his comments defined
the other side of the increasingly public, not to mention squalid, tribunal
debate, by reminding the Lebanese that this is both a sovereign and legal issue,
one that cannot be automatically snuffed out by the bully boy elements of
Lebanese politics.
Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement was also press ganged into airport duty.
Aoun defended his party’s presence by saying it was there to stand by the
judiciary to liberate it from “the political pressure that is preventing Sayyed
from achieving justice.”
Can there ever have been a more pathetic excuse from a man who, on the one hand,
claims to be leading what he is calling an “intellectual revolution against
corruption,” while on the other knows he has put all his political eggs in a
basket shot through with corruption? Surely Aoun must see that his so-called MOU
with Hezbollah back in February 2006 – a vainglorious gamble that defined his
personal political aspirations, but which hinged on Hezbollah being everything
it claimed it was and not what the rest of us could see it was – is now coming
back to haunt him.
For today, the once presidential hopeful who rode back into town on a horse of
transparency and the promise of a new political dawn is forced to publically
defend the actions of a former Syrian lackey and murder suspect, while being
allied to a party that clearly eschews state institutions, the defense of which
his party’s ideology is predicated on. Some dawn.
Meanwhile, it is becoming increasingly clear that Hezbollah is fundamentally
incapable, as Kataeb leader and former President Amin Gemayel said in Zahle on
Sunday, “[of dealing] with the Lebanese state, people, army and institutions as
a party that is under the law, not as a party that is above all authorities and
laws.”
The war against the tribunal may be warming up, but Hezbollah is running out of
options. As March 14’s Mohammad Chatah asked over the weekend, what is the point
of preserving the Resistance if there is no state to protect? The party knows
this, despite its veiled threats and scaremongering tactics that the tribunal
will ignite unprecedented sectarian strife. It has little room to maneuver. It
is a situation best highlighted by the fact that it co-opted a man whose name is
a stain on the history of modern Lebanon.
Lebanon
on verge of 'new wave of insanity'
Tensions soar as rivals trade blows over Tribunal
By Patrick Galey, Carol Rizk and Agence France Presse (AFP)
Daily Star staff/Monday, September 20, 2010
BEIRUT: Lebanon teetered on the edge of a “new wave of insanity” Sunday as
Hizbullah and the Future Movement traded angry accusations of undermining the
state.
The mudslinging came after Jamil al-Sayyed, a former chief of General Security,
returned to Beirut and announced he was commencing legal action against State
Prosecutor Saeed Mirza’s request for interrogation.
Sayyed, who came back to Lebanon on Saturday under heavy Hizbullah and Lebanese
Army security, called Mirza’s actions “illegal” and based upon “false evidence.”
“Mirza is supposed to be a public prosecutor – i.e. neutral – but considering
these lawsuits he became my personal adversary,” Sayyed said.
Sayyed was held for four years without trial under the United Nations
International Independent Investigation Commission (UNIIIC) into the
assassination of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri, who was killed by a car bomb in 2005.
Sayyed, as well as Hizbullah and some political allies, have accused security
officials, politicians and judges close to Prime Minister Saad Hariri of
fabricating evidence in order to implicate him and three others in the crime.
Mohammad Kabbara, Tripoli MP and member of Hariri’s Future Movement, accused
Sayyed and Hizbullah of undermining the Lebanese judiciary in a bid to discredit
the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), a UN-backed court created to try
suspects in the Hariri killing.
“The enemies of truth and justice, meaning [Hizbullah] and its allies, have
brought down the Lebanese state in preparation to bring down the international
tribunal,” he said in a press conference Sunday.
Speculation has increased following comments from Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan
Nasrallah that party members may be implicated in Hariri’s killing after
indictments are issued by the STL.
Kabbara also warned against attempts to unseat Hariri as the leader of Lebanon.
“Whoever threatens the leader of the Sunnis or the position of prime minister,
with his own hands or not, the Sunni sect will teach him politeness,” he said.
Hizbullah spokesperson Ibrahim Moussawi countered Kabbara, accusing the Future
Movement of “running the country like an abandoned farm.”
“The latest stances adopted by some of the leaders of the Future Movement
constitute a coup on state authorities from within,” he said. “What is dangerous
is that some members of the Future Movement are raising tensions and instigating
sectarian feelings through dragging the country toward civil strife after
labeling political stances on a sectarian basis.”
Hizbullah’s parliamentary bloc leader Mohammad Raad said the party would refuse
to be influenced by sectarian rhetoric.
“We refuse that Lebanon becomes a hostage to the games and schemes of
politicians who do not have a clear national strategy. We feel that Lebanon will
witness a new wave of insanity in the coming days and weeks because certain
groups have failed to confront facts and realities,” he said during an honorary
high school ceremony in Nabatieh Sunday.
Sayyed held a news conference Saturday at Rafik Hariri International Airport,
reiterating his insistence that those responsible for false witnesses be brought
to book.
“There is no judiciary or justice if false witnesses and those behind them are
not held accountable,” he told reporters.
In a repeat of his previous direct attack on the prime minister, Sayyed said he
would not accept any STL indictment “before [former UNIIIC chief Detlev] Mehlis,
[General Security Head Ashraf] Rifi, [Head of Internal Security Forces
Information Branch Wissam] al-Hassan and [State Prosecutor Saeed] Mirza are in
Lebanese prisons or in prisons in The Hague.”
He added that there would be no confidence in the UN
‘turn to page 2
‘from page 1
court until “the Arab world and especially the Sunni sect realize why the
conspiracy of false witnesses happened, why [Saad] Hariri and March 14 were
involved, why they took over the country and why they punished the Lebanese
through false witnesses.”
The head of the Internal Security Forces snapped back at Sayyed vowing to take
legal action against him.
“Prison is made for you and people like you and for killers under your
protection,” he told Sayyed in a statement on Saturday. Rifi also enumerated
what he dubbed as the “atrocities” Sayyed did when he was at the head of General
Security.
Sayyed’s comments at the airport repeated those he made last week, which
prompted fierce reaction from Hariri’s allies and led Mirza to push for legal
proceedings against the former general.
Hizbullah sources vowed to “take off the unjust hand that harms Sayyed.” In
remarks published Sunday by pan-Arab daily Ash-Sharq al-Awsat, the sources
accused “some judges” in Lebanon of being “politicized and dishonest.”
Future Movement MP Okab Saqr warned that belligerent rhetoric risked tearing
Lebanon’s delicate sectarian balance apart at the seams.
He said Hizbullah’s support of Sayyed was “the first direct gunfire from
Hizbullah aimed at the Syrian-Saudi understanding. This is through targeting
institutions and going down to the street.
“The street Sayyed and Hizbullah refer to is surely not demonstrations, taking
into consideration the weapons they own,” Saqr said. He added the dispute was
not a Sunni-Shiite disagreement.
“The confrontation is not between March 8 and March 14, it is between a party
who wants to shake the foundations of the state and a party who wants to
preserve its institutions,”he added.
Media reports Sunday suggested that Hariri was soon due to return from Saudi
Arabia. Sources were quoted as denying that Hariri was considering bowing out of
politics due to the STL fracas, but as refusing to deny his disgust with the
affair.
The Cabinet will meet Tuesday for a regular session and Hariri is expected to be
in attendance.
Dispute raged in his absence.
Kabbara accused Hizbullah of having “brought down the entire Lebanese state
either through attacking Sunni leader Saad Hariri or through attacking the
position of prime minister.”
Moussawi, for his part, said the issue of false witnesses would not be muddied
by political antagonism.
“All this noise will not succeed in making the public overlook the necessity of
trying false witnesses and those who fabricated them as a first step toward the
truth,” he said. – with AFP