Posted by
Gabrielle Cusumano on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 6:24:23 PM
Key Lebanese politician assassinated
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Pierre Gemayel, an anti-Syrian politician and scion of Lebanon's most prominent Christian family, was gunned down Tuesday in a carefully orchestrated assassination that heightened tensions between the U.S.-backed government and the militant Hezbollah.
Anti-Syrian politicians quickly accused Damascus, as they have in previous assassinations of Lebanese opponents of its larger neighbor. Gemayel, 34, an outspoken opponent of the Syrian-allied Hezbollah, was the fifth anti-Syrian figure killed in the past two years and the first member of the government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora to be slain.
The assassination, in Gemayel's mainly Christian constituency of Jdeideh, threatens further instability in Lebanon at a time when Hezbollah and other parties allied with Syria are planning street protests unless Saniora gives them more power.
The United States denounced the killing, calling it "an act of terrorism." The U.N. Security Council said it "unequivocally condemns" the assassination as well as any attempt to destabilize Lebanon.
Saniora went on national television to call for unity and warned that "sedition" was being planned against Lebanon. He linked the slaying to the issue that sparked the crisis with Hezbollah: plans to try suspects in the 2005 assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri before an international court.
"I pledge to you that your blood will not go in vain," Saniora said, eulogizing Gemayel. "We will not let the murderers control the fate of Lebanon and the future of its children."
Gemayel, Lebanon's industry minister and a member of the Phalange Party, had just left a church and was traveling through Jdeideh when a vehicle in front of him slammed to a stop, causing his car to ram it, security officials said. Witnesses said Gemayel's car was also struck from behind.
Three gunmen stepped out of the other vehicles and shot Gemayel at point-blank range with automatic weapons, security officials said.
Video showed Gemayel's car, which apparently had been shot at from both sides: The passsenger-side window was shattered and the driver's-side window was dotted with about a dozen bullet holes, and the front hood was crumpled.
Gemayel's driver, who was wounded but survived, rushed the gravely injured politician to a nearby hospital. Soon afterward, Voice of Lebanon — the Phalange-run radio station — reported Gemayel was dead — the fifth member of his family to die in violence.
President Bush denounced the assassination as an attempt to intimidate Saniora's government.
"We support the Saniora government and its democracy and we support the Lebanese people's desire to live in peace," Bush said in Honolulu. "And we support their efforts to defend their democracy against attempts by Syria,
Iran and allies to foment instability and violence in that important country."
Bush stopped short of specifically blaming Iran or Syria, calling for a full investigation to identify "those people and those forces" behind the killing.
In Washington, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said: "We view it as an act of terrorism. We also view it as an act of intimidation."
Damascus' opponents in Lebanon have accused Syria of being behind previous assassinations, particularly that of Hariri, who was killed in a bombing in Beirut in February 2005. Syria has denied those claims.
Syria called the assassination "a despicable crime," and Hezbollah also condemned it. "Those who committed this crime want to push Lebanon toward chaos, despair and civil war," said a statement read on Hezbollah's Al-Manar television.
A stunned Amin Gemayel, the slain lawmaker's father and Lebanon's former president, urged his supporters to observe a night of "prayer and reflection over the meaning of martyrdom."
"We don't want an outburst of emotions and revenge," he said outside St. Joseph's hospital, where his son died. "He was martyred for the cause of Lebanon and we want this cause to triumph."
Hundreds gathered at the hospital, and supporters railed against Hezbollah and Michel Aoun, a Hezbollah-allied Christian leader who is a rival of the Phalange.
Wael Abu Faour, an anti-Syrian lawmaker, told Al-Jazeera: "We directly accuse the Syrian regime of assassinating Gemayel and hold (Syrian) President Bashar Assad responsible for this assassination ... aimed at sending Lebanon into a civil war."
In an interview with CNN, Saad Hariri, Rafik's son and leader of the anti-Syrian parliamentary majority, implicitly blamed Damascus, saying, "We believe the hand of Syria is all over the place." He said Gemayel was "a friend, a brother to all of us" and appeared to break down after saying: "we will bring justice to all those who killed him."
Gemayel's death came hours before a deadline for the U.N. Security Council to approve a letter endorsing an agreement with Lebanon to create a tribunal to prosecute Rafik Hariri's suspected killers.
Ahead of the deadline, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the assassination showed why a tribunal to prosecute those responsible for political killings in Lebanon needs to be established. He grew angry at the suggestion that the process be delayed until Lebanon was more stable.
"They're killing people in Lebanon. They're assassinating political leaders. Not the time to seek justice? There may be those on the Security Council who say it. Let then step forward and say it," he said.
Four Lebanese generals, top pro-Syrian security chiefs, have been under arrest for 14 months, accused of involvement in Hariri's murder.
"I think the facts need to be developed," Bolton said when asked about Syria's involvement in Gemayal's killing. But, he said, given "the evidence that links the Hariri assassination to the other political assassinations, I think people can draw their own conclusions."
Pierre Gemayel was expected to carry the mantle of the political family. Amin Gemayel, his father and the current Phalange leader, was Lebanon's president between 1982 and 1988. His grandfather, the late Pierre Gemayel, led the right-wing Christian Phalange Party that fielded the largest Christian militia and was allied with Israel during the 1975-90 civil war between Christians and Muslims.
Amin Gemayel's brother, Bashir, was elected president in 1982 but was assassinated days before taking office. Two of Amin Gemayel's nephews and Bashir's daughter were killed in the 1970s and 1980s.
The slain Pierre Gemayel was a prominent figure in Lebanon's anti-Syrian bloc, which dominates Saniora's Cabinet and the parliament — and which is now locked in a power struggle with the Muslim Shiite Hezbollah and its allies. He was elected first in 2000, then re-elected in 2005.
Christians make up about 35 percent of Lebanese, down from estimated 55-60 percent before the 1975 civil war. The decline is attributed to emigration of Christians and higher birth rates among Muslims. The Maronite Catholics are the largest single Christian sect, estimated at 900,000. The last official figures are from Lebanon's 1932 census.
On Sunday, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah threatened a wave of street protests aimed at bringing down the government if it ignores the group's demand to form a national unity Cabinet, in which Hezbollah and its allies would have considerable influence and would be able to block major decisions.
Nasrallah accused Saniora's government of falling under the influence of the Bush administration and called it "illegitimate" and "unconstitutional."
Gemayel's assassination was the first since Gibran Tueni, prominent anti-Syrian newspaper editor and lawmaker, was killed in a car bomb in December 2005. Journalist and activist Samir Kassir and former Communist Party leader George Hawi were killed in separate car bombings in June 2005.
By SAM F. GHATTAS, Associated Press Writer Associated Press
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061121/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_minister_shot
Lebanon on the Brink of Civil War (2)
On November 3, 2006, MEMRI reported on political tension in Lebanon, which
has increased to the point where civil war appears imminent - due to
Hizbullah's violent struggle to seize a significant portion of the
government by instigating street clashes.(1) Hizbullah Secretary-General
Hassan Nassrallah even issued an ultimatum, threatening that his people
would take to the streets on November 13, but the ultimatum was later
extended, pending consultations between Hizbullah and the "March 14 Forces."
The failure of these talks led to the resignation of the five Shi'ite
ministers, representatives of the Hizbullah and Amal parties, from the
Lebanese government. At this point, Lebanese President Emile Lahoud declared
that the government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Al-Siniora government
was "illegal," a statement later reiterated by Hizbullah and its political
allies.
Following these developments, Hizbullah leaders and their political allies
stepped up their statements, threatening that "surprise" tactics would be
used and that the street protests would begin without warning. It should be
noted that these statements and threats are supported by Syria and Iran.
In a special speech on November 19, 2006, Nasrallah declared that attempts
to reach an understanding with "the governing faction" [i.e. with the March
14 Forces] had failed, and that the goal was now to topple what he called
"[U.S. Ambassador to Beirut] Feldman's government" by taking to the streets.
(Previously, Nasrallah had outlined two possible ways out of the crisis: the
establishment of a National Unity Government or early parliamentary
elections).
Nasrallah did not specify when his people would take to the streets, but
called on Hizbullah to be in a state of full readiness, since the protests
"might start in less than 24, 12, or even six hours." Al-Jazeera TV, which
is close to Nasrallah, stated in reference to this speech that "the zero
hour is very near, and may come after Lebanese Independence Day [November
22, 2006]."
As in the case of the recent war in Lebanon, the timing of the current
crisis serves the interests of Iran, which is facing a U.N. Security Council
discussion on proposed sanctions against it. The timing also serves the
interests of Syria, which is currently trying, with Russia's help, to stop
an international court from being appointed to tackle the case of the
assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri (a decision
that could also harm the pro-Syrian Lebanese prime minister, Emile Lahoud).
However, in the current crisis, unlike in the previous one, Hizbullah will
probably avoid involving Israel, in order to prevent any Israeli
interference in his attempt to seize a significant portion of the Lebanese
government.
The following are statements recently made by Hizbullah and its political
allies:
Iranian Daily Affiliated with Khamenei Calls to Change the Political Balance
of Power in Lebanon in Favor of the Shi'ites
On November 8, 2006, the conservative Iranian daily Kayhan, which is
identified with Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, wrote that in light of
the new strategic order that has emerged in the Middle East, the Shi'ites in
Lebanon must receive the largest representation in the Lebanese government
institutions: "We must see how things actually develop in Lebanon. [This
country] is currently facing changes that the existing [government]
institutions cannot [handle], so [these institutions] must necessarily
change. One of the frameworks that must change is the Taif Agreement
signed... by America and France, by heads of Arab states, and by heads of
[various Lebanese] groups. Today, these Arab governments - and to a large
extent also America, France and those [Lebanese] groups - have lost their
role, and have been replaced by new forces. The Shi'ites now constitute 40%
of the [Lebanese] population, and occupy 40% of the Lebanese territory. They
are the most united [group in Lebanon], and
their security-military forces have become the most significant forces in
that part of the Arab region [i.e. in Lebanon]. Therefore, they must have
the greatest presence in the [Lebanese] government and parliament and in
other Lebanese institutions..."(2)
Lebanese Parliament Speaker: "Iran Will Be the Leading Force in the New
Phase [That Has Begun]"
On a brief visit to Iran, Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Beri met with
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. In his
meeting with Khamenei, the latter stressed "the readiness of the [Lebanese]
people and of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon [i.e. Hizbullah] to deal
with every contingency." He added that Lebanon would be where America and
the Zionist entity will meet with defeat, and said that "political
developments in the region and the world confirm that a new phase has
begun." He stated further that "America's policy in the region and the world
is on the brink of defeat," and that "this opportunity must be exploited to
the full through determined action and trust in Allah the Almighty."
During the meeting, Nabih Beri said: "Allah has rewarded those who wanted to
implement the plan of the Greater Middle East [i.e. the Americans] for their
plotting and deception. The latest developments [in the Middle East] are the
beginning of the fall of the American empire... The victory of the Lebanese
[people] and of the Islamic resistance [i.e. Hizbullah] played a significant
part in the defeat of the Republican party in the recent congressional
elections [in the U.S.]." Beri added that "America and the Zionist entity
are trying to keep the Islamic Republic [of Iran] from exerting its
spiritual influence in the region, [but] the Islamic Republic of Iran will
be the leading force in the new phase [that has begun]."(3)
In his meeting with Iranian President Ahmadinejad, Beri spoke of "the plots
of the enemies, and especially [the plots] of the West, headed by the U.S.,
which are meant to create anarchy and generate dispute among the various
Lebanese factions." He stated that "the Arab states must take special steps
to thwart the enemies' plot of [instigating] strife," and said that "the
Islamic Republic of Iran has a leading and essential role in this
regard."(4)
Nasrallah: We will Soon Have a New Government
In the Al-Dhahiya neighborhood in Beirut, Nasrallah told an audience of over
7,000 that "the current government will soon go, [and will be replaced by] a
pure government that will [help] you [i.e. the people of South Lebanon] to
repair the damage caused by the [Israeli] aggression... The current
government is disloyal, since it knew about the [Israeli] aggression [in
advance], and asked [the Israelis] to prolong their aggression... This
government will not stay [in power]. We will form a new government."(5)
Hizbullah: Civil Disobedience Is a Legitimate Option
Ghaleb Abu Zaynab of Hizbullah's political bureau said that "civil
disobedience is a legitimate option... The interior minister's refusal to
issue licenses for demonstrations will not impede our activities. If the
government tries to play games of this sort, it will be making a big
mistake. But I do not think that it will [try to] prevent the
demonstrations, since this would bring the country to a state of maximal
tension."(6)
Muhammad Ra'd, chairman of the Hizbullah party in the Lebanese parliament,
said on Hizbullah's radio station Al-Nur: "There are [all sorts of] surprise
tactics that the opposition may employ, like the resignation of the Shi'ite
[ministers], which took the governing faction by surprise. All options are
open. The popular action will come at the appropriate time and place, and in
a manner that will achieve [the desired] results."(7)
General Michel Aoun: As of Today, the Government's Orders Must Not Be Obeyed
General Michel Aoun, a Christian, said at a convention held by his party,
the Free Patriotic Movement, that "the [current] government is illegitimate,
and therefore, as of today, its orders must not be obeyed." At the end of
his speech Aoun called on the "[opposition's] units" to "get ready to take
to the streets as soon as tomorrow," and declared: "We will use the streets
to make history - we will either fail or succeed."(8)
In a meeting with students at the American University of Beirut, Aoun
accused the ruling faction - that is, the March 14 Forces - of "being
afflicted with every kind of mental illness that exists." When asked if
Hizbullah meant to take to the streets, he replied: "[Taking to the] streets
is one option, but [now] there is a possibility of other arrangements... The
[current] situation will come to an end very soon, Allah willing, so we can
celebrate the new year [2007] in satisfaction and tranquility."
Aoun added: "I think that the government is responsible for the [current]
deadlock, because it has lost its national consensus and is responsible for
delaying the resolution of this crisis"... I've called upon [Al-Siniora to
resign] and I am now doing so again... His resignation is the only solution
that will allow everyone to deal with the situation. But if [Al-Siniora]
continues to regard himself as prime minister, we will prove to him that
this is unacceptable, and take the necessary steps - and it will be he who
is responsible for any negative outcomes [that may emerge]. There is no
solution except for [Al-Siniora] to resign."(9)
Hizbullah-Affiliated Daily: The Opposition Does Not Plan to Announce When
and Where It Will Take to the Streets
In an article in the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, known to be affiliated with
Hizbullah, editor Ibrahim Al-Amin wrote: "There is no longer any chance of
[of reaching] a partial agreement [between Hizbullah and the March 14
Forces]. Neither side has any way of protecting the state against the evil
confrontation that has begun, and not only behind closed doors... The big
problem is that the division has reached the point where it is difficult to
find a quick solution without significant external intervention... However,
according to an Arab diplomatic source, the problem has to do with America's
refusal to initiate dialogue with Syria before there are developments in
other issues, [unrelated to] Lebanon...
"As far as the opposition [i.e., Hizbullah, Amal, and Aoun's party] is
concerned, the die has been cast. The [Lebanese] government and its
resolutions must not be recognized; it must be treated as an illegal
government. Therefore, the opposition's plan of action does not depend on
the current government's agenda, or on receiving its permission [to
demonstrate]. Lebanese Interior Minister Ahmad Fatfat hasn't yet
comprehended this fact, [and therefore does not understand] why [the
opposition] has not yet requested a license to demonstrate... "When the
operational [phase] begins, the opposition will not inform the Interior
Ministry of the timing and route [of the demonstrations], or about anything
else...
"The opposition has decided to take [the following] intra-organizational
steps in order to avoid numerous [unfortunate] contingencies:
"The demonstrators of Hizbullah and the Free Patriotic Movement will not
enter the inner neighborhoods of Beirut, since this may lead to conflict
with the majority group [i.e. the March 14 Forces], which may develop into a
conflict between sects or factions.
"[The opposition] will recruit hundreds or even thousands of activists who
will be in charge... of the popular activities. Among their other
[responsibilities, they will] prevent [the demonstrators] from approaching
any [government] facilities with the purpose of doing damage. In addition,
they will perform activities that serve the purpose of the demonstration,
and prevent majority [supporters] from attacking [the Hizbullah
demonstrators], unless someone in the majority group [deliberately] leads us
into a bad situation. Those in charge of the demonstrations have also been
instructed to tolerate any level of oppression [on the part of the Lebanese
security apparatuses] including the possibility of gunfire...
"The tasks have been divided among the various opposition forces... The
various regions in Lebanon have been divided into zones, which will enable
us to flood Lebanon with two million demonstrators in a single day, if such
a decision is taken.
"No region will be excluded [as a location for demonstrations] under the
pretext that it is under the authority of this or that official institution.
[For example], Shuhada Square [in Beirut] will not be considered as [the
territory] of one faction only [i.e. as March 14 territory], but will be
used [by the opposition] whenever the need arises.
"The decision to take to the streets has already been made, and its
implementation depends on matters that appear simple but will [in fact]
determine the outcome [of events]. The opposition is determined to keep
[these details] a surprise."(10)
*H. Varulkar is a Research Fellow at MEMRI.
Endnotes:
(1) See MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No. 299, "Lebanon Faces Political Crisis in
Aftermath of War: Tensions Escalate Between 'March 14 Forces' and Hizbullah,
Pro-Syrian Camp," November 3, 2006,
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=ia&ID=IA29906.
(2) Kayhan (Iran), November 8, 2006.
(3) Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 15, 2006.
(4) Mehr News Agency (Iran), November 13, 2006.
(5) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), November 14, 2006.
(6) Al-Nahar (Lebanon) November 16, 2006.
(7) Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 15, 2006.
(8) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon) November 17, 2006.
(9) Al-Nahar (Lebanon) November 19, 2006.
(10) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon) November 17, 2006.
*********************
Lebanon on the Brink of Civil War By H. Varulkar*
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent,
non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle
East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background
information, are available on request.
MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with
proper attribution.
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
E-Mail: memri@memri.org
Search previous MEMRI publications at www.memri.org
out an aerial attack against a vehicle carrying terror operatives.
http://imra.org.il/story.php3?id=31674
Until the end of the 1960s, Lebanon is an almost scandalously pleasant place. Here, all the misfortunes of the Arab world, the wars against Israel and the crises and coups are transformed into currency that flows into the countless pockets of Beirut. Caught between Syria and Israel, blessed with an agreeable climate, this small country has for years boasted of its parliamentary democracy, freedom of the press, banking confidentiality, the beauty of its women, its water skiing and winter sports. Lebanon is a part of Europe, a privileged territory, a Switzerland in the Middle East, a peaceful harbour in a brutal region, francophone, anglophone, tolerant and blessed.
The Six-Day War in 1967 destroys this illusion. Israel captures the remaining parts of historical Palestine (the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem) as well as the Sinai in Egypt and the Golan Heights in Syria. This time the Arab defeat is such that no one escapes a beating. In that scene of general chaos, the "Palestinian Resistance" enters the stage, grabs its weapons and swears to rescue its lost honour. Over the next two years, the organization sets up camp in Jordan, organizes the hijacking of jets to draw attention to itself, and demands the return of a land, their land - Palestine. King Hussein of Jordan is furious and takes tough measures against the group, which lead to their expulsion from the kingdom in 1970 and their return to Lebanon.
A year earlier, Lebanon's unstable central power had had the bad idea of signing a document, "The Cairo Accords," which allowed the Palestinian Liberation Organization to settle down there, to take over large areas of southern Lebanon and use them to launch attacks on Israel. The result is predictable: The border catches fire, and the extreme fragility of the Lebanese structure becomes evident - a democracy only on the surface, but in truth an extremely unstable mosaic of different religious groups.
Up to to this point, the weakness of Lebanon is seen as a virtue enabling it to avoid the regional wars. With the outbreak of this crisis, this norm is upended. Armed militias are formed - "Christian" on one side, "leftist and Muslim" on the other, fighting for the division of power between the religious groups as well as over the question of the military presence of the Palestinians in Lebanon.
Suddenly, Lebanon finds itself again in the position of the region's weak spot, the substitute location where all conflicts are carried out in microcosm, instead of growing to their full size. The paradise that the land had previously known turns against it. Lebanon becomes the inferno of other peoples' wars, as well as its own. In 1975, civil war breaks out - generously supported by Lebanese militia, various Palestinian groups, Syria, Israel and practically the entire world. The war lasts 15 long years, claims 150,000 lives and fathomless destruction.
At the outset of the conflict, the Syrian Army changes sides and comes to help the Christian militia, taking advantage of their military defeat. That enables Syria to occupy the northern and eastern regions of Lebanon. In 1978, the Israeli Army marches in with the goal of creating a buffer zone, which they hand over to a Lebanese militia.
The most important turning point takes place in 1982, when Israel's then defence minister Ariel Sharon sends his troops right to the gates of the Lebanese capital to curb once and for all the Palestinian military presence. After three months of siege and bombardments, the goal appears to to have been reached: 14,000 Palestinian fighters are forced to leave Beirut and scatter through the Arab world. Yassir Arafat and his general staff go into exile in Tunis. There are no more Palestinian weapons on Israel's borders.
But appearances are deceiving, victory and defeat are often very close neighbours. A few days before be becomes president of the Lebanese Republic, the main ally of Israel, Bachir Gemayel, is killed, The Israeli Army reacts. It closes off Beirut and allows Christian militia to force their way into the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, where they carry out a bloodbath, killing at least 1,000. An Israeli investigating commission later places indirect responsibility on its Army and on its chief of staff, Ariel Sharon.
So the invasion of Lebanon ends dishonourably. In the months that follow, Israel tries in vain to sign a separate peace treaty with Lebanon. Israel is forced to return to the southern part of the country. Slowly, Syria takes the upper hand. But this does not solve the problems in Lebanon. As if to contradict everyone who insists that the Palestinians are the source of all problems, war breaks out: between the Druse and Christian militia, between Shiite militia and Palestinian refugees, as well as between various Palestinian groups in the north and east of the country.
The Syrian Army, which plays its classical role as one who both sets the fire and puts it out, returns in 1987 to Beirut. Two years later, this provokes a Christian military uprising of General Michel Aoun. This uprising leads to clashes between rival Christian groups. Lebanon's calling as a battlefield is maintained, throughout the chaos.
The most important event following the Israeli invasion of 1982 is the founding of Hizbullah through revolutionary guards sent directly from Teheran via Syria. They are not an additional party in the Lebanese scene, but rather the establishment of a new mentality, a new logic. Because despite everything, the majority of the militant organizations up to this point identify with a more or less secular Arab nationalism. The goal remains the "liberation of the earth" (in other words, the liberation of the Palestinian territory) and the alignment of the Arab world with modernity and "progress" (takaddom), more or less on the Western model.
However Hizbullah is no longer interested in opening itself up to the West, but in delivering the West the hardest blows it can, to show that the battle supported by "God is the greatest" is more effective than all else. The attack on the American and French multinational troops in Beirut resulting in 299 fatalities and the kidnapping of foreigners in Lebanon open this new Islamicist era. Bit by bit the Shiite community, which represents the bulk of the troops of the Lebanese Left, joins up with Hizbullah or its Shiite rivals, the Amal Movement.
At the end of 1989, Saudi Arabia invites all Lebanese parties to the city of Taef in an attempt to end the war. The conference concludes with a series of resolutions. These realign the division of power between the communities in favour of the Muslims, recognise Syria's role of godfather in the Lebanon, and decree the disarmament of all militias with the exception of Hizbullah. Why? Because Hizbullah is not a militia, it is "an organisation of legitimate resistance" fighting for the liberation of the South. The fuse is lit on the bomb that has now gone off today.
In the meantime, the Lebanese hesitate to look back and are delighted at the return of peace. They put their energies into rebuilding their country under the leadership of Rafik Hariri, a Sunni businessman who has become a billionaire. The years pass and the war abates, although it continues in the south. In 2000, under military pressure from Hizbullah, the Israeli army unilaterally pulls back behind the border, letting the Shiite organisations cry "victory" and regain military control over the south. The country congratulates Hizbullah on this unexpected result, and invites it to relinquish its weapons and once more fall in line with the civil, normal life of all Lebanese.
But just like Syria and Iran, the Party of God is deaf in one ear. In truth, the army and the Syrian hotbeds across Lebanon have considerably gained in influence. Over the years, a consensus develops between Lebanon's political powers and religious communities, calling for Syria to withdraw. The Syrians answer by – successfully – stipulating an unconstitutional prolongation of the Lebanese president's term in office. And they murder Rafik Hariri, who had attempted to resist them.
The calculation proves extremely dangerous. Suddenly Lebanon overcomes its fear and rises up against the Syrian occupation. An entire young generation unfamiliar with the civil war goes onto the street, calling for democracy, independence and sovereignty. The world, led by France and the USA, supports the movement. This leads to a Security Council resolution calling for an end to the Syrian occupation and the disarming of Hizbullah. Now on the defensive and forced to order the withdrawal of its troops from Lebanon, Syria answers the boldness of the Lebanese with a series of murders. But slowly, supported by Iran which has become arrogant by the American deadlock in Iraq, the Syrian regime once more gains the upper hand.
In this context, the attack of Hizbulla that leads to the current crisis conforms to no inner Lebanese logic. Rather, it complies with Iran's strategy to begin a military conflict with Israel, and Syria's strategy of winning back its lost influence. Stripped of its hope, Lebanon discovers that 15 years after the peace agreement, it is still a battlefield for wars bigger than it is itself.
*
The article originally appeared in German in Die Tageszeitung on August 7, 2006.
The Lebanese writer Selim Nassib was born in Beirut in 1946 and has lived since 1969 in Paris. He is author of "I Loved You for Your Voice.".
http://www.signandsight.com/features/927.html