From Beirut to the Beltway

Stealing the show

2009-11-06T07:09:16-05:00

Those of us with memory recall how the Assad regime manipulated the Lebanese system and pit political players from each community against one another with every major turning point. Today's events are no different, though the moukhabarat has been replaced with Hizbullah. While Hizbullah was unsuccessful in breaching the Sunnis, they managed to break the Christian Maronites in half, and spooked the Druze—or at least their leader—into becoming a neutral if not negative force.

If you are still unclear on what the real issue is, then look no further than the archives of this very blog. This telecommunication ministry demand is nothing but Hizbullah working to keep its own illegal telecom network and spying efforts running. Aoun has become the paid defender of their interests: Hizbullah pays him by elevating him into a power figure. He successfully, thanks to Jumblatt's exit from March 14, managed to change the subject and make the discussion about him, and not Hizbullah.

While this suits the self-centered Aoun, this does not bode well for the country. Several key issues are not being discussed, at least not in the open. Paramount among them is Hizbullah's weapons. Aoun's charades somehow made that issue seem insignificant or appear "divisive", until the patriarch brought it up again. Sfeir's statement was a reminder to all, that while they were busy playing by Aoun's rules, a significant issue was being overlooked. Why can't that issue also be a hot issue, given what happened when Hizbullah invaded Beirut and the Chouf, using weapons it claimed were meant for the resistance?

Has March 14, or, as they choose to call it these days, "the parliament's majority", become so emasculated that it cannot even set the topic of discussion? Who is going to protect the people who elected the majority to parliament? If Aoun gets his ministries, will people become safer? Will the rule of law apply to Hizbullah, the SSNP and the extremists that are being fluffed by a decrepit Assad regime?

One can easily blame Jumblatt for putting his weapons down, and choosing the path of "national dialogue" and the new emerging "Arabo-Iranism". But the man is getting old. And he has no real support from outside—an unfortunate requirement for Lebanese politicians. With Europe, the United States and some Arab countries thinking they could "engage" the Assad regime or at least force a divorce between Assad and Ahmadinejad, Jumblatt is left with no real political backing for himself and his community. So he has convinced himself that the old path was right, and that the March 14 days were a wrong detour. At least the old is predictable. Ships never came to stop Hizbullah from invading his commune and that of his friends, and he had no desire to wage war at this old age.

This is not to offer excuses for his behavior, but just to remind ourselves that March 14, just as "March 8", was doomed to failure without some consistent and strong external support. The Lebanese formula and the situation in the country dictate it. The Lebanese are too stuck in their uncivil ways to form an effective movement that could change this formula overnight. Think of Hizbullah's occupation of downtown Beirut: the message was clear: we can counter your popular movement with the same, even if our people are farm animals to your sexy hippies.

Sadly, at the end of the day, and from this vantage point, this isn't about Lebanon. There are far more important issues in the eyes of the big players. It's a sad realization: Lebanon's independence is dependent on the generosity of others. Freethinking is slave to a massive delusion stemming from conspiracy theories, unrealized dreams, and contagious bloodshed.

Perhaps one day a new generation will manage to find a new way out. Until that happens, I think the Lebanese owe it to themselves to not let red herrings like Aoun steal the show.

When words fail us

2009-10-10T14:03:02-04:00

I think Pierre Sadek captured this ridiculous moment quite well:

Aoun, Bassil and March 14's resistance against Hizbullah

2009-08-16T13:06:24-04:00

Those following the cabinet formation circus in Lebanon must be puzzled by two things: Aoun's flagrant nepotism, and March 14's inability to explain why, given how cabinet appointments are made in this country, Aoun is not being allowed to name the minister of his choice.

Gebran Bassil might not be the most inspiring choice for telecom minister (a post that he currently holds), and indeed, he seems like a really bad one, but what, really, is the issue with him? His incompetence? Qualities a different FPM minister could bring to the table that Bassil can't?

It appears that there is more at play here. Bassil, after all, is a mini Aoun, imitation-folly at best. He has the demonstrated ability to be obstructive and the willingness to bend the FPM's own alleged ideals to service the interests of his father in law, and more importantly, those of Hizbullah. For that, Aoun sees him as the preferred choice.

What we have here is a distrustful Aoun (of his own party) on the one hand, and on the other, an unspoken March 14 concern that Hizbullah's continued indirect control of the telecommunications ministry means no serious reform of the sector will take place, and that eavesdropping and domestic spying by Hizbullah will continue. It is not a secret that the party of perpetual "resistance" benefitted a lot from Bassil's control of the ministry, on many levels, including turning a blind eye to the existence of Hizbullah's private telecommunication network.

March 14, and Saad Hariri in particular, has not been able to present a strong and convincing public argument against keeping Bassil as a minister. The PM designate probably does not wish to ruffle Hizbullah's feathers at a point the public thinks he has their blessings, though this might change following Hizbullah's recent criticism. Instead, Hariri's people have been resorting to arguments about nepotism, cohesiveness in the cabinet, ineligibility of those who lost elections, and lame and unimaginative accusations about Israeli-linked internet networks.

Hizbullah's defense of Aoun's demand wasn't a surprise, and takes advantage of Hariri's weak strategy, although their argument that there is no legal reason for election losers to become ministers contradicts their (and Aoun's) opposition to March 14 presidential candidates who had lost parliamentary elections (think Nassib Lahoud).

March 14, or what's left of it after Jumbaltt's departure, shouldn't be shy to point out Hizbullah's role here, and their continued use of Aoun and the FPM as cannon fodder. Anyone bemoaning the return of Syria to Lebanon should pause and reflect on how Hizbullah has pretty much filled the role previously played by Syrian intelligence. The Party of God has been playing the role of occupier since the May 7, 2008 invasion of Beirut and the apparently galvanizing attack on Jumblatt's Chouf.

There is more at stake here than just a game of stubbornness and obstruction. Unfortunately, Jumblatt was the one who once tasked himself with "exposing" some of Hizbullah's motivations, and their agenda to turn the country into an ideological concentration camp. Now that Jumblatt is on the divine victory bandwagon, singing the praises of the resistance "past, present, and future"-- , and lecturing Hariri about Sunni Islam, March 14 finds itself lacking the ability to throw punches.

There is no doubt that March 14's victory in the elections was dealt a severe blow following Jumblatt's defection. This battle against Aoun over the telecom ministry would have been easier to fight with him on board. In 2008, Hariri backed a "Walid Jumblatt government" that didn't hesitate to take on Hizbullah. Today, he is being told to head a government of "true partnership" that will arguably be weaker and less effective than the ones Siniora headed. No wonder Saad seems so despondent at times. The resistance against Hizbullah's and Syrian domination has just become a lot harder. One wonders if he would have agreed to the premiership had Jumblatt announced his decision sooner. But that is a different discussion.

A "true partnership" to avoid

2009-08-05T21:44:48-04:00

It's tornado season in Lebanon. The balance of power is out of whack, awaiting Saad Hariri's return from his surprise vacation to resume his consultations to form a cabinet.

Just last week, Hassan Nasrallah was singing the praises of the upcoming cabinet, which seemed like a done deal. So perfect it was going to be, Nasrallah even described it as a "true partnership". This wouldn't be laughable if it weren't coming from the man who refuses to partner up with the state's institutions.

In fact, the only hurdle left by July 31 was that crazy man Michel Aoun, who was whining that "nobody consulted him", insisting on making his son in law minister.

The formula was going to look like this: 15-10-5.

Cut to today. Jumblatt, who was going to be represented in March 14's 15 share, decided to break with his partners by suddenly renouncing their slogans—which he had helped formulate.

Is this the "true partnership" that Nasrallah was talking about? One where Jumblatt is neutral, or neutralized, and Hariri unable to command a majority in the cabinet, or block any attempt to knock out UNSC 1701?

During the parliamentary elections, many in Lebanon were convinced that Jumblatt was going to ally himself with Hizbullah. The transformation was ready, but Jumblatt didn't do it. Maybe it was Biden. Maybe it was something else. He instead chose to stay in the March 14 camp, even giving up a few seats for the sake of his former trench buddies. Whether or not he had then decided to claim his independence at a later stage is left for the history books.

Hariri and Geagea have opted to flee the country than face the new reality that their former death list buddy created. After all, the day has come when Wiam Wahab is saying good things about his former enemy, bestowing Syrian amnesty on the man who once wished to overthrow the Assad regime. And Jumblatt has miraculously rediscovered "Palestine and Arabism", so "Lebanon First" now sounds... phoenician. Saad Hariri, by Jumblatt's new benchmark, appears like the leader of the Sunni version of the New Phoenicians. Who knew that Beirut's Sunni's are less attached to Palestine than Lebanon's Druze?

With Jumblatt today coupling his support for Hariri with a clarification that the Druzes' survival depends on a rejection of Lebanese sovereignty as March 14 defines it (demarcation of border with Syria, end of Syrian interference), the balance of power in the country appears to have suddenly tilted back towards Hizbullah.

Jumblatt has violated the terms of the agreement with March 14. In theory, Saad and his remaining allies need to gather their strength, give Walid a big hug, and tell him to go find neutrality elsewhere, and quit asking for a change in slogans.

Of course this is easier said than done. Mostly because, March 14's strength, if that existed, emanated from the men who made it, not so much the principles or the "slogans" they devised. Just as Lebanon depended on a pact between men, March 14 was, at times, nothing more than a marriage of convenience.

Saad's choice is not easy. The producer has left the building. The young Hariri has to go it alone without his father's friend, and grow up fast, real fast, if he is to stop the country from sailing towards Nasrallah's "true partnership".

A new beginning, but not for Lebanon

2009-08-03T22:21:41-04:00

They say old habits die hard. This blog died, albeit softly. Walid Jumblatt, some will also say, lived to kill, again, those who died for an idea he helped foment.

But to attack Jumblatt for his gradual about face risks lending his soon to be former friends an undeserved credit for waging a good fight. For none of them, ironically, showed the guts Jumblatt showed during the fabled Cedar Revolution. When he drew the line, they cheered, mimicked, or produced nothing of consequence. Some were too weak and unimaginative, others were shackled by their criminal past. So when Jumblatt decides to run for the hills and disassociate himself from them, one has to wonder whether he's partly doing it for lack of faith in his comrades, and in those who promised him the moon. Jumblatt woke up from the red and white dream to find the swamp underneath full of alligators that are tearing apart the fabric he tried to patch up. No US muscles or European currency could send them away. The US had gone Obama's way, and Europe is in bed with Sarkozy. The age of new beginnings had come. What is the point of the fight, Walid thought, when the result would never amount to independence sought? Why engage in a bloodbath featuring farmed martyrdom-bound humanoids and insane orange lemmings?

The man who helped give Bashar nightmares and strip Hizbullah of its myths gave up. He did not want to fight the kind of independence battle that many idealists on this very blog wished for the Lebanese. So, we got this:

Jumblatt emphasized his desire for the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to unearth the truth behind the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, without countries influencing its decisions and meddling with its results.
He expressed regret about meeting with neoconservatives in the US to protect the Cedar Revolution, describing the meeting as a “black point in the party’s white history.” He also added that it is “not PSP policy to meet with those who have spread chaos in the Middle East, however, our priority was the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.”
He also commented on Lebanese-Syrian relations, emphasizing the necessity of having good relations with Syria now that Syria’s mandate over Lebanon has ended.

Many will fault him for the above, and explain it as typical "pendulumistic" behavior, a la Jumblatt. That's fair. But those who accuse him of killing March 14 are wrong, for that movement died long before.

I remember a defiant Jumblatt at the Brookings Institution in March 2006, months before the July 06 war, and at a time we were still running on the heat of the revolution. Here is some of what he said.

"It's a long struggle", he said, much harder than the Ukranian revolution, which was a "promenade" in comparison. "The March 14 forces are weak on their own. We need Arab and international backing. That's why I am here."
He said Lebanon faces the fundamental issue of how to "reconcile the independence movement with the Syrian regime. Can democracy coexist with a dictatorship next door smuggling weapons? If we don't change Syrian policy in Lebanon, there will be no independence."

Lebanon could not get the kind of support Jumblatt shopped for, at least not in Jumblatt's limited time frame. Instead, the country got a war by Israel, war by Syria via Fateh al-Islam, war by Iran via Hizbullah in Beirut, the Doha agreement from the Arabs, and a president that embodies the failure of the state. No ships came to the rescue, and worse, the Lebanese themselves proved to be too obsessed with cosmetics to care about the disease that lurked under their skins.

And Jumblatt himself failed. His arsenal was depleted. What would you like the old man of the mountain to do that he didn't try during what he now calls the "black" years of the revolution? In that same defiant Brookings speech, he had confessed that he never opposed the Syrian regime that killed his father because he "lacked moral courage". Now that he has seemingly been shown that moral courage is synonymous with suicide, Jumblatt defaulted to moral cowardice to survive and achieve peace, and reap the promised fruit of the fabled "new beginning", albeit at the expense of an independence that will likely never come.

The past ends here.

2009-02-17T14:46:04-05:00

They say home is where the heart is. But when your home breaks your heart, do you look for a different home?

That’s essentially me. Over the past four years, sometimes on the pages of this blog, I shed all the broken pieces of the heart that Lebanon broke. In 2005, when a car bomb put the country on an existential trajectory, I shifted gears, changed my cause, and started an epic to defend a picture of Lebanon that, looking back, had never been, and will probably never be.

Around the same time, my heart was acquiring a different home. The move began one sunny morning in a city otherwise known for its fog, and continued when two angels came into my life, giving me a new sense of purpose, and anchoring me to a new reality.

Lebanon became my past, and though it survived in words I typed on this blog, it started to take the backseat with every diaper change and every family celebration outside the Lebanese box. Last year, fate had it that I became a US citizen without any family by my side, as if to test my new loyalty. I waved the American flag alone, swore to defend my adopted country, and promised to renounce allegiance to my birthplace. From then on, the USA became first. Lebanon was past tense.

It became harder to blog. It had been gradual. It was one disappointment after the other. It’s not like I didn’t know what to expect. But my past just did not want to end. It continued into my present, shackling me with a weight that I could not bear. Not if I wanted to live free. The end came, however, when I saw the passport. Like others like me, it seems, I had been waiting for the ship. And when the ship came, I took it, willingly, and with a sense of satisfaction mixed with the sweet taste of revenge. I am finally where I can be better.

My new American dream replaced my Lebanese nightmare, at least during the day, when ghosts hide under pillows. At night, however, they rear their ugly heads, redrawing that path of self-torture that raised me. I will probably always dream of the shells, the darkness of the shelter, and the frustrations of living small in a place that pretends to be large. But when the light rises from behind the hill, I am new. Remember that myth about the Phoenix rising from the ashes? It is true. But in my case, life came back somewhere else.

That was my past. Thank you for reading. This blog is over. My story begins.

Looking beyond the horror

2009-01-01T21:30:17-05:00

When Hussein rode his Arabian horse to Karbala more than 1400 years ago, he knew the risks involved getting beheaded by nascent Muslims, but he did not know that his death would be incorporated into a pseudo-Arab martyrdom formula. What would Hussein, the prophet's grandson, think today if he heard Hassan Nasrallah, who chose life in a hole over decapitation, likening Gaza to Karbala?

There is no doubt in any Shia mind that Hassan Nasrallah is having a field day with what Israel is doing in Gaza. Appearing on TV recently to condemn Israel, Egypt and his own lack of candor, he presented us with the same old two choices: surrender or resistance.

We are before a great scene from the scenes of Karbala… The truth about Karbala is that there is a group that believes and holds on to its dignity, rights and honor of the nation, refusing to obey the oppressors… It stood up and resisted. Whenever it is put before two choices: surrender or imbalanced resistance, it chooses resistance. We as Lebanese can understand what is happening Gaza. It is the same as what happened here... The same choices are offered, the same battle and, hopefully, the same result.

It’s Karbala all over again indeed, but not because Palestinians are dying, but because Nasrallah’s Karbala-propelled franchise is producing even more tragic results in Palestine than it did in Lebanon in 2006. Not only are Hamas' attacks against Israel predictably weak and strategically stupid, their people have not been able to savor the purity of Iranian money. Instead, they were made to live under siege, starving, unemployed, and slowly dying—at least until the bombs start falling. Hizbullah in Lebanon at least feeds its martyrs.

All that should come as no surprise. Hamas failed to follow the path of Karbala (how can they even understand it?), and instead tried to jump to the conclusion of someone else’s adventure. Today, they are nowhere near liberating Palestine. But they’re very much in the same hole Nasrallah put his people in when he decided to stretch and franchise his resistance brand.

So Nasrallah lashes out at the evil Sunni regimes. This is all, he claimed, part of the plot to kill off the resistance in the region. Whether it’s bombardment of Gaza, or the Lebanese government trying to instill rule of law on its own territory, it’s all part of the same Arab-Israeli evil plot to shut down McNasrallah.

The hole that Hamas dug for itself and the people it hijacked may be getting deeper, but don’t count on this region’s inhabitants to lift the Palestinians out of this wretched existence, or see through Nasrallah’s rhetoric. Anger, most of it of course justified, is leading and blinding the way. The tragic images from Gaza will provoke a lot of protests against the perpetrators of these war crimes. But will they provoke some soul searching, and re-examination of how best to get out of this vicious cycle? Is it through rockets, or a different kind of resistance?

An imaginary world

2008-12-08T14:01:45-05:00

Almost a year ago, "terrorists" blew up and killed a top Lebanese general, prompting the then army commander to insensitively proclaim, on television, and to the victim's family nonetheless, that the army has plenty of other soldiers like Francois. On the first anniversary of his assassination, we hear some decisive language, but sadly not comforting.

The Lebanese army on Sunday vowed to continue its fight against terrorism as it marked the first anniversary of Maj. Gen. Francois Hajj's assassination. The army insists on "tearing out the malignant roots of terrorism wherever they were found," the army command said.

A mass service was held in Hajj's memory in his hometown of Rmeish in south Lebanon.

"The day will come when the killers will be uncovered and put on trial," said Brig. Gen. Panos Manoujian who represented Defense Minister Elias Murr and Army chief Gen. Jean Qahwaji at the mass.

"Terrorists thought that by killing one of the pillars of the military institution, they could confuse the army and hinder its national role. However, the military tree is more solid and much higher with the martyr's blood," he said. (Naharnet)

So who are the "terrorists"? And where do their "malignant roots" grow? In Baabda, where he was killed? In Damascus or Tehran, where the president seems to be extending his own roots? It seems to me that the Lebanese military believes in the imaginary nation of Terrorism Land, where terrorists are born, bred and nurtured outside modern notions of time and space.

But then, Lebanese authorities cannot even distinguish traffic violators from law abiding citizens, so why expect them to see the roots of terror? That what we got, one year on, is a slight bending to the will of Assad as far as military policy is considered, shouldn't come as a surprise. Suleiman got the message, and he will never do it again. He has Aoun to learn from, and Hajj's blood to remind him of what fate awaits those who wage battles against Syria. They either become mentally unstable or get put on a death list. So creating a safe imaginary world will do.

Lebanese deserve carrots too

2008-12-01T09:20:22-05:00

I don't know about you, but I am getting tired of all the assassination talk. First it was Suleiman Franjieh predicting that a major incident similar to the Hariri assassination will rock the nation of Lebanon. And now March 14 deputies are predicting killings to "muddle the International Tribunal's work and monopolize people's decisions before the 2009 parliamentary elections".

These prognostications are taking place against a backdrop of high level visits to Assad's Syria and Iran, making the situation seem all the more absurd.

Nothing protects you against murder and inspires confidence like sending your top general to meet and seek military assistance from those who killed your country's former prime minister and massacred a bunch of MPs and journalists!

Sending the army commander so soon to Syria, and without any kind of coordination with the cabinet, sends another signal that Lebanon's military, exclusively led by the president, is following its own convoluted agenda. Michel Suleiman is using his meeting with Bashar a couple of months ago as a mandate to appease the Assad regime and force a normalization of ties between the two countries before borders are even demarcated. And just last week, this same president signed a 5-year "security pact" with the Iranian regime to supply Lebanon with "defensive weapons to be agreed upon in the framework of a defensive strategic system the Lebanese will formulate".

These activities make any fears about the harmful effects of engagement by the US and Europe look ridiculous, since the parties who will allegedly get hurt are now doing a lot worse (mind you Jumblatt is not too happy, and neither is March 14, but they're postponing any real opposition until after the elections). But if Lebanese officials are driven by a morbid sense of pragmatism, mixed with good old subservience and treason by some, there is no reason for some Western powers not to offer them all some backbone. Do Lebanese people not deserve carrots? Talk to the Syrians and Iranians all you want, but unless you have masochistic desires to see Lebanon turn into an Iranian satellite, do direct some effort to warn the delusional and disillusioned against signing the country away in defense agreements and joint security committees.

AUB student elections: why everyone lost

2008-11-27T09:02:17-05:00

Those rejoicing over the results of student elections at AUB, which incidentally is my alma mater, need to stop and think twice about it all means. For this blogger, this is not a lesson in democracy or democratic governance, this is transposition of feudal and sectarian politics into a college campus. Casting ballots to pick someone based on their affiliation to outside parties with no agendas relevant to student life is unfortunate. AUB officials ought to protect the student body against this kind of theft of democratic principles. The leaders of tomorrow need to understand that improving the conditions of their constituents, not those of the lord outside the gate, should be their platform. One person interviewed by Now Lebanon echoed this well:

Becky Katz, an American graduate student at AUB, who until Tuesday was a candidate for election among international students and has participated in student elections in the States, said that while it's understandable "given the dense and highly charged political environment that student activists want to begin playing a role, the student government is polarized by these parties and as a result is paralyzed… Students are unable to organize collectively and efficiently to advocate on their own behalf and improve student life."   

"The initiatives of one party tend to be turned down by another just because of the national political divide," Katz added. "There's less of an emphasis on platform and more of an emphasis on simply which Lebanese party you side with."   She said the political divide created by student candidates who represent national parties also "creates problems after the elections, breeding an atmosphere of hostility and hindering the capacity of students to work together."

Nobody is saying students can’t have political affiliations. But what kind of message are we instilling in the new generation when we allow their student life to be polarized and paralyzed even before they are let out into a society they are entrusted with enriching and improving?

Of course, when even March 14 leaders hail the results of student elections as a “message” that validates their political agenda, there is little hope that one day, change will come to this little country, in a form that will preempt the kind of events that have rocked it since its inception.

Aoun, Jouzou, and their Lebanon

2008-11-23T15:21:45-05:00

It’s painful enough to listen to Michel Aoun preach about the alleged failure of the American model, and how he allegedly made all the successful choices in the past. But now Sunni Mount Lebanon mufti, Mohammad Ali al-Jouzou has sailed into the Aoun-Hizbullah twilight zone:

The Mufti of Mount Lebanon Sheikh Mohammed Ali al-Jouzou said he approved of the position of Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun with regard to broadening the culture of resistance among the Lebanese population, especially among Christian factions. Jouzou said in a statement issued on Sunday that having Muslims and Christians carrying weapons to resist Israel, in cooperation with the army, would be “the most honorable battle” and a “great achievement and historical event.”

Jouzou said he was ready to even go further and ask for the immediate implementation of Aoun’s “great” defense strategy, starting with the training of all youth in the use of weapons and establish mixed Christian-Muslim military bases. He also encouraged spreading weapons among all citizens so that they could integrate themselves with army brigades in order to become a parallel army.

“That is why I call for distributing weapons to all youth trainees, and giving licenses so that weapon carriers are not attacked, as is currently happening. No citizen of the North, Beirut, or Bekaa would be arrested for carrying weapons, in the same way as citizens of the South, Dahiyeh, and Ramil al-Ali are allowed to carry weapons and roam with them everywhere without any objection,” he said. “General Aoun’s request is fair, because we all become one [equal] before the army and security forces. Our youth will not be imprisoned if weapons are found on them, whether they carry a license or not, while others roam with their weapons freely because they are weapons of the Resistance,” he said.

Jouzou said that justice in the country was seen from only one perspective, because all those accused of terrorism were Sunni. He called on March 14 to approve Aoun’s defense strategy proposal which “transforms the Lebanese population into a resisting population; accordingly, our weapons become resistance weapons like Hezbollah’s weapons.” (Now Lebanon)

I don’t believe this was sarcasm. And for the record, I expected nothing enlightening from that man. But what we have here is a prime example of why, one day after Lebanese independence day, this nation is doomed thanks to the prevalence of such trash. Although on the opposite end of the political spectrum, they embody the failure of the Lebanese model, where religious clerics play dangerous politics, and MPs behave like de-facto presidents, or prime ministers, dictating policy, and threatening violence, as Aoun did if elections don’t go his way.

So it’s really rich for Aoun and others like him to claim that the American model “failed”. The only failure I see is what they exhibit day after day in Lebanon. Despite the harsh economic conditions we are living, and the effects of the Iraq war, the United States has not collapsed. The election of Obama, whether you like him or not, and the hope that is driving so many, including those of us who just began to live the American dream, stand in sharp contrast to Lebanon’s pathetic political class, lack of democratic spirit, and the abject subservience to foreign agendas at the expense of national interests. Look no further than John McCain’s concession speech to understand what America stands for. Contrast with the above examples, which, though not representative of Lebanon's potential, are nevertheless the reason why so many of us have stopped looking towards our country of origin for inspiration.

March 14 and the Arab League

2008-11-19T13:42:53-05:00

March 14’s call on the Arab League to form a “fact-finding mission” to investigate the Fateh al-Islam group will likely increase the dandruff population, since many inside and outside of Lebanon will be furiously scratching their heads in wonder over the futility of such a move. The Syrian media stunt had left many in the failed independence movement angry at the regime’s insolence in making up facts and airing them so blatantly. How dare they accuse the free Lebanese of conspiring to kill their own? This at a time the Lebanese and their counterparts in the UN have been investigating for years now! So, March 14 logic goes, if anybody has the moral right to fling accusations, it is March 14. And the logic continues: The Arab League should act. As if the league members do not already know who is behind this group, or need a fact finding mission to figure it out. Whatever happened to the briefing on the Islamist group that Siniora gave Amr Moussa many months ago? They didn’t condemn the Assad regime then, and they will not condemn it tomorrow. Not even Europe is prepared to level accusations at Assad. International denial and compromise is the name of the game -- just read the naive statement by British FM David Milliband on Syrian-Lebanese relations and the UK and Syria cooperating in the fight against terrorism.

So why is March 14 expecting the league to deliver what Lebanese authorities and the world couldn't? And does this call not undermine confidence in the work of the UN commission and the Lebanese authorities? Why are Lebanese papers bothering with accounts of arrests and investigations? Will the Arab league unearth evidence or facts that years of interrogations, investigations and fact-gathering by hundreds of individuals from across the world didn’t?

The Arab League involvement makes no sense. If this is March 14’s way to defend itself against Syrian accusations, then someone in their leadership needs to fire his advisors.

Of course, the Lebanese government’s response was as pathetic. They send the interior minister to Syria, and continue pushing for diplomatic relations with the regime, and form a committee to “address methods of cooperation”. Sending Baroud with no mission to defend his country and confront the accusers is an act of treason. And having your information minister, who once denounced the regime’s acts, say that relations between the two countries are “built on mutual respect” is mind-boggling. The same can be said about this whole embassy business. The Lebanese government should not have accepted diplomatic representation before the Hariri investigation is over. In most other countries, ambassadors are expelled and embassies shut down when there is violation of sovereignty and sponsored murder. Lebanon, however, chose to REWARD the Assad regime by not only agreeing to exchanging diplomats before a criminal investigation is concluded, but also allow the Syrian regime to vet all candidates for the post of Lebanese ambassador!

Of course, this twisted logic was made possible by the Arab League. That March 14 is yet again resorting to this body is yet another thing to add to the heap of nonsense that is Lebanese and Arab Politics.

Desperate moves

2008-11-10T10:00:41-05:00

You know the Assad regime is desperate when their own creation had to issue a statement denying televised allegations that they were behind a recent Damascus bombing. Fatah al-Islam today denied claims in “confessions” aired by Syrian TV that they orchestrated the attack with Hariri money.

The regime, looks like, has re-discovered itself stuck between two countries inching towards relative stability. Lebanon, and Iraq, despite their domestic theatricals and unknown long-term viabilities, are arguably more stable than in recent years. The same cannot be said of Syria, which has had to endure violence and recently, humiliating American and Israeli attacks.

Of course, the Assad regime brought all this upon itself. Fatah al-Islam was a slightly more organized version of its Iraq efforts. Thinking they would be scoring points against the US and March 14, and perhaps relieve pressure caused by the Hariri tribunal, the regime resorted to becoming a conduit for terrorism. Perhaps more foolishly, Assad thought he could become a nuclear power.

At the end, you reap what you sow.

Considering that these allegations surfaced on the eve of visits by the Lebanese interior and defense ministers, one has to wonder how many regimes the Syrian regime has produced over the past year. The “confessions”, which could not have been the product of judicial transparency that does not exist, looked like the work of a disgruntled official who couldn’t believe relations with the Lebanese have devolved into pseudo-normalized relations. Embassy? An interior minister who has no allegiance to the lion? A defense minister who rebelled and escaped assassination, and has the audacity to visit? There are a lot of negative things that can be said about the current Lebanese situation and about Syrian-Lebanese relations not being ideal, yet. But you couldn’t help but gloat a little bit when you see functioning Lebanese cabinet ministers arriving in Damascus to represent their country, and not to report to the ruler.

It increasingly looks like anything positive in Lebanon or Iraq will produce negative repercussions on the Assad regime. Some in Lebanon figured it out. Even the fakest of reconciliations could plunge the Assad regime, which feeds on conflicts, into turmoil. This formula is something to learn and run with, though not to be used as a bible. Spread the love, and let the terminally ill die a natural death. No “engagement” will cure the ailments of one of the sickest regimes on earth.

Hush Hush Tribunal

2008-10-24T09:07:22-04:00

According to Naharnet, the final report by the UN commission in charge of investigating the Hariri assassination, "will not point to any defendant, witness, or concerned individual related to the investigation from near or far." Not only that, some of the tribunal sessions will be "confidential".

Information disclosed that part of the silence is probably to remain even during the work of the tribunal, since available information points that some of the testifying witnesses will not have their identity exposed even after ending their testimony. Some of the court sessions will be confidential in testimonial content and the identity of those testifying.

I understand that justice is blind. But also mute?

Sarah Palin vs. Joe Biden

2008-10-03T00:12:50-04:00

Today's debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden was a sad reminder how McCain's choice of VP is a threat to national security. Palin dodged most questions to recite what her tutors taught her in the past five weeks, proving once that McCain cares more about serving as president in the remaining years of his life than putting this nation on a better track. Joe Biden, on the other hand, and after an uncharacteristically subdued performance during the first half, was for unfathomable reasons coached not to "kill" her. And he could have, very easily, pointed out how she was unfit to become a vice president, rather than leaving it to the partisan imagination.

But the tragedy is not in Biden not going after Palin. The tragedy was in Palin being unable to effectively go after Biden, for she showed no signs that she understood or digested a single word of what she was taught. Instead, we got a lot of winks, fake kitchen table tales, and "darn rights". For the same reason she butchered the name of the commander of the US forces in Afghanistan, she couldn't answer the question pertaining to recent US policy towards Israel, specifically, when Biden accused the administration of not properly supporting the Jewish state after the US and France allegedly "kicked Hizbullah out of Lebanon"! (update: the full quote is: When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel)

Followers of this blog know what an idiotic statement that was, and how superficial and uninformed it is. But with Palin as an opponent, could you really expect someone to call him on it?

Another danger came when Palin faithfully regurgitates what the coaches told her to say about the "Surge". Apply it everywhere, they told her. Biden nailed her on it. But although the Obama-Biden Iraq strategy is riddled with fantasy, all Palin could offer was a weak argument about "winning" and how great McCain was in pushing for the "Surge". So Biden won the argument, as did Obama during his first debate, and the nation sunk deeper into ignorance about the country that is today very far from being a project for success.

McCain's Surge. What a travesty to ascribe this tactic to the Senator, when in fact it was a result of work done by people inside this very administration that everybody loathes. And how wrong it is to say that it led to a victory, or could lead to one. What is victory anyway? And victory for whom, and against what, and how do you measure it? The walls and fault lines that separate Baghdad neighborhoods today and the irreparable damage done to the US stature in the world, speak of a different reality than the one Palind an McCain paint. Sadly, and while Obama points it out clearly, the solutions that both he and McCain prescribe are detached from reality.

Going back to the core issue here. By picking Palin, McCain robbed this nation of a safety net, should his old body fail him. I can probably live with McCain in charge of foreign policy. But I cannot trust Palin's with the nuclear codes, or "nucular" in Palin-speak. If she couldn't handle the simple task of understanding the issues, instead accepting the role of a puppet, then she and the man who chose her simply do not deserve a vote.

Lastly, and this is a note to some of my readers, at least the remaining ones, spare me your partisan politics. What has been disheartening to me over the past few months was how quickly certain people can turn against you when you disagree with them, or when you attempt to think outside the ideological box. It is no secret to anyone that my posts about Hizbullah, and Obama's statement on Lebanon, were widely popular and heavily quoted by many "conservative" bloggers. Today, I stand in amazement at some of those bloggers' inability to get over their obsession with negating the other's point of view, and in the process denying themselves the truth they claim to seek or represent. The "left" often exhibits the same fanaticism and self denial.

It is the sad truth that to many, country doesn't and will never come first, and that change will unlikely come as long as we don't understand what it is we really need.

In the meantime, we're left to choose the lesser of two evils. And sometimes, that choice is made easier when confronted by the intolerance and racism of those who won't eat a doughnut if it's not dressed in red and blue, or won't accept questions from a black journalist.

Update. Now Lebanon on Biden's gaffe. He meant Syria!?

Joe Biden, the US Democratic Party’s vice-presidential candidate, condemned Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah on Thursday night, but mixed up Hezbollah with Syria.

Speaking in a debate with his opponent, Republican candidate Sarah Palin, he referred to the US’s Middle East policy by saying, “When we kicked - along with France - we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon,” a statement assumed to confuse Hezbollah with Syria.

Biden said that both he and Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama had said, “‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know - if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.’”