- First, let’s get my shameless self promotion out of the way: Do make sure you follow my own twitter account @beirutspring. I am following almost 400 Lebanese people, and keep looking to retweet interesting posts. You can also look at the people I’m following and follow them

- Make sure you’re following @sharek961 , which is a volunteer based organization that maps the Lebanese elections live on their website. @sharek961 actively retweets all the reports it’s getting from the field. (Full disclosure: I volunteered to design their site)

- Go to http://search.twitter.com and look for #lebanonelections. It sort of became the conventional tag, but some are still using #lebaneseelections and #lebelections. If your’re a twitterer yourself and want to file a report, don’t forget to tag it (who knows, we can even make it a twitter trending topic)

- Other notable Twitterers to follow: @nowlebanon , @sharek961, @meetsamer, @hibz , @LB_ELECTIONS_09 , @abuhatem .

There, I hope that was useful :)

Here’s the problem:

There are very important events taking or about to take place in Lebanon (Elections, Egypt-Hezbollah spat, attacks against our army. ), and yet, as you noticed, I can’t seem to find the time to collect my thoughts and discuss things with you guys over here. For the record, that really sucks.

So what’s a Lebanese with many thoughts on his mind and little time on his hands to do? Abu Kais, friend and venerable blogger has pulled the plug. I thought about doing the same but didn’t get the heart to do it. This is why I’ll be doing the next best thing: I’ll be updating from Twitter.

Twitter is a great medium to express and share fast thoughts and Ideas. It conveys the message, suggests links and opens the door for a discussion. It’s like blogging on a smaller scale and does the trick for me. It’s great for fast updates in days of crises and excellent for finding and suggesting cool links about Lebanon.

This doesn’t mean that I’ll stop updating beirutspring.com. Every now and then, I’ll be writing normal posts over here, and the best way to know about them would be following me on Twitter.

So go ahead, if you don’t have an account, create one, it’s worth it. Follow me @beirutspring and I’ll follow you too.

For those who still prefer old media, you can always email me to beirutspring@gmail.com for your thoughts and suggestions..

Bummer. It turns out Hillary Clinton is just Like George W. Bush after all. Or so it must be what’s going through the heads of the Iranians and the Syrians right now. The “axis of evil” states are suddenly coming to the realization that President Obama won’t be so cuddly after all.

How could the Iranians not be concerned, as they watch America’s top diplomat all but ignore their darling Hamas while showering cash and praise on their nemesis Mahmood Abbas, the President of the Palestinian authority? How could they not be queasy as they watch Hillary’s chumminess with the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a man they worked so hard with their proxies to discredit..

Not that things are better for the Syrians. Bashar El Assad thought that he was hearing great news: Two top washington officials are to be dispatched for talks. Finally, they’re talking to us! He must have thought. But then came the shocker: One of the two is Jeffrey Feltman. Yes, that Jeffrey Feltman, the same “Godfather” of the Lebanese Cedar Revolution, the man who worked hard to kick them out of their cherished Lebanon. How could anything good come out of that man?

You see, this is the American way of telling the Lebanese: Don’t worry, we got your back. And just in case you still don’t get the message, or are still in anyway concerned about a deal that will sell you out, Feltman and Shapiro will visit Beirut twice: Once before heading to Syria and once after coming back. They will also have dinner with M.P. Saad Hariri, a man whose movement attacks Syria anytime it gets the chance to.

Add to that a sprinkle of symbolism for the most die-hard of conspiracists: American officials made it clear that the visit “Will not take place on March 8″, the date in which hundreds of thousands of Pro-Syrians marched in Beirut in 2005. Ahh, the Fletman effect has begun…

In other words, while many Arab and Iranian commentators will fret about how America “still doesn’t get it”, the Lebanese should try -for a change- to shelve their paranoia.

While reading the coverage of Mr. Obama’s interview with Alarabiya on American news websites and blogs, I’ve noticed  that an important angle of the story was missing. People either extolled Mr. Obama’s “brave” and “audacious” overture  or criticized his supposed naiveté and implied that by granting an Arab station an interview, he was somehow selling out Americans. 

Missing in all that coverage (and apologies to those I might have missed) was a small detail that has the potential to add texture and subtlety to an otherwise straightforward story. 

You see, Al-Arabiya is not Aljazeera. In fact it is the anti-Aljazeera. In that proverbial divide between moderate and fanatic Arabs, “moderates” (those who are more interested in shopping and trading than killing Americans and Jews) generally prefer Al-Arabiya’s milder narratives and its overall friendliness to the west. Hisham Melhem, the Lebanese anchor who conducted the interview is a supporter of the “Cedar revolution”, the pro-western movement that sacked the Syrians from Lebanon 3 years ago. Moreover, Alarabiya is funded by the Saudi King who is leading the so-called moderate front in a cold war pitting realists  against hardliners who are lead by Iran. 

Alarabiya is the Arab MSNBC to Aljazeera’s FOX News, and President Obama’s granting Alarabiya his first interview instead of the slightly more watched Aljazeera is the media equivalent of him calling Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and shunning Hamas’ leader Ismail Hanié.

In short: While President Obama’s interview looks on its surface like an “opening up” to the Arab world, with all the due emphasis on mutual respect and change of course, it is also a pointed snub and a shrewd maneuver in the heart of the war of ideas taking place in the Arab world.

So far, Mr. Nassrallah is only using his “soft power”. Relying on his prestige and influence among Arab masses, he urged Egyptians to break open the walls of Rafah with their “bare chests”. Whether  his prime-time TV address makes a difference is not clear yet, but Hezbollah has a big question in its mind at this moment: Should it join the war and open another front?

While some might find the question easy to answer, Hezbollah strategists and game theorists have their work cut out for them; not joining the war is risky because it would demonstrate that the 2006 war did put an end to Hezbollah’s ability to poke Israel when it wants to relieve Hamas. That would undermine Hezbollah’s entire narrative of victory against Israel in 2006 and show weakness.

At the same time, joining the war isn’t easy. Lebanon is not yet ready for a re-run of July 2006, and Mr. Nassrallah knows that the Israelis would be even more deadly and ruthless this time around. The Lebanese President and the minister of Defense pointedly made the point from the southern border that while we should all vocally protest the Israeli aggression on Gaza, Lebanon is no launching pad for Missiles.

There are other reasons why Hezbollah should think twice before joining Hamas in its fight. The cheap price of oil has put a financial strain on Hezbollah’s main backer Iran. This means that reimbursing people whose houses were destroyed will not be easy this time, let alone replenishing their stocks of expensive missiles.

Also, by joining the war Hezbollah risks postponing Lebanese parliamentary elections scheduled for early 2009. As things stand, Hezbollah and its allies have a decent shot at gaining a majority in the parliament and rolling back last last 3 years of anti-Syrian dominance. Politically, Hezbollah is right where it wants to be at this moment and the last thing it needs is a war that might compromise its internal standing.

So what is a Party of God to do? 

Do what Sayyed Hassan is doing: Use strong rhetoric and secretly hope that international and Arab pressure will end the war as soon as possible. If all else fails, provoke the Israelis into doing something stupid in Lebanon and pounce on the opportunity. After all, as they all say: “They started this!”

Everyone loves Hamra (Reuters)

When countries choose locations for their embassies in other territories, one of the major factors deciding their choices is the level of hostility they could expect from that country in the future. This is why American embassies are isolated fortresses in the Arab world, while Swedish and Canadian embassies often occupy regular flats in big cities.

So when Syria chose Hamra, the bustling quasi-bohemian Beirut high street, to host its temporary embassy in Beirut, it wanted to send a strong, confident signal to the rest of the world: We are in friendly territory.

And yet, the location can be fraught with minefields for Damascus. Hamra is a walking distance from two American universities with a high concentration of anti-Syrian students. Anti Syrian demonstrations (say in the event of an assassination) and counter pro-Syrian ones would fill up the relatively narrow streets and bring the entire already-busy neighborhood to a standstill.

The Syrians could yet change the location if it proves too unbearable for comfort. The temporary nature of the Hamra location could prove to be a test balloon. But for now, Damascus is hopeful that the Lebanese will put the Syrian ambassador in their hearts. If not, then perhaps accept his presence in Beirut’s heart.

So what’s your take on this? Syrian embassy in Hamra: Good or Bad?

It was by all means a feat by our Minister of defense Mr. Elias El Murr. As he toasted his celebratory vodka with his Russian counterpart, he must have predicted how the Lebanese, people and media, would be overjoyed by the promised spectacle of modern fighter jets wearing a cedar tree.

Politicians are rushing to embrace the story. To March 14, it’s “proof to Syria that Lebanon is an independent and sovereign country” as the Hariri-owned Al-Mustaqbal newspaper put it. To the Hezbollah and Arabist types, it’s an act of liberation from an Israeli-imposed ban on weapon sales to this country.

But regardless of which point of view you come from, it will not be hard for you to notice –after the party is over and the corks are swept away– that the Mig-29s could be a meal that the Lebanese will find hard to digest.

Not withstanding the political headache of of assigning pilots and staff to the liking of all sides, the economics of such a deal are ominous; as the Lebanese daily Assafir puts it:

هل نحن على مستوى الدخول في منظومة متكاملة، تبدأ مع إرسال نحو ثلاثين ضابطاً من الجيش اللبناني على الأقل للتدرب كطيارين على الـ»ميغ ٢٩«. وعلى خط مواز، إرسال نحو مئة من أفراد الجيش للتدرب في روسيا كفنيين، يؤمّنون الصيانة الكاملة لهذا النوع من الطائرات. كما أن هذا الأمر يوجب على الجيش اللبناني صيانة القواعد الجوية أو تأهيلها، وبناء الهنغارات اللازمة لمبيت المقاتلات وأعمال الصيانة لها.

Translation: Are we capable of setting up an entire (military) system that begins with sending 30 Lebanese army officers -at least- to train as pilots for the Mig-29s, in addition to one hundred soldiers tasked with learning how to fully maintain such fighter jets? Not to mention the necessity of refurbishing and maintaining Lebanese airbases and hangars that would accommodate those planes.

The deal specifically states that the costs of maintaining and training the Migs should be borne by the Lebanese state. The same state, mind you, that is struggling to pay for teachers and workers and whose finances are so strained we had to beg for ParisII donors and their humiliating strings.

So the costs are high but the benefits should be worth it, right? I’m not too sure. Will 10 Mig-29s be sufficient to affect the balance of power with Israel? Would they present any form of military deterrence? What guarantees that the Israelis won’t just wipe them out in one preemptive strike like it did to the Egyptian Air Force back in 1967?

In other words, the Lebanese are about to take ownership of very expensive showpieces that would most likely just end up lying around.

Back in 2002, When I was listening to the Arab peace plan as proposed by the King of Saudi Arabia, I remember having mixed feelings. The plan, branded as “historic”, proposed peace with Israel in return for a return to the 1967 borders. The plan sounded too much like something the Arabs would say to deflect accusations of inaction, or perhaps a way of putting the huge ball in Israel’s court to offload the burden of peacemaking on the rest of the world. I never really took it seriously.

But on the other hand, the plan makes sense and in my opinion is the only way to make a historic step forward. The problem is that it steps on too many toes: The Iranians (and their proxies) won’t sit idly by and watch their pretext to armed-resistance go away. The Syrians won’t just let go of their regional influence (which is based on its ability to make trouble), and The Israeli religious right won’t just “allow” Jerusalem to be divided and the Golan to break free.

As many observers have noted, peace in the Middle East can only move forward when a combination of factors take place simultaneously:

1- A committed American administration willing to bang heads together
2- An Israeli leadership with a mandate and willingness for peace,
3- A weakened “axis of evil”.

If this article is correct, we might have all the three happening at the same time: Mr. Obama would be willing to take the dive, Tsivi Livni -if with any luck she gets elected- supports the plan, Iran is hurting from low oil prices and Russia (which has taken to propping up Syria and Iran to spite Bush’s America) would be brought in with a quid-pro-quo involving an American concession regarding the missiles shield in Eastern Europe in return for more pressure on Iran and Syria.

As with many other plans by Mr. Obama, the one involving peace in the Middle East requires a healthy dose of “hope”.

If you really think of it, Lebanon is the very opposite of what president Barrack Obama represents. The notion that any young citizen, with enough hard work and ambition, can become whatever he or she wants to be in the future is the antithesis of our own, archaic system.

How can you not be embarrassed, watching the Obama spectacle, if you live in a country where your destiny is dictated by the God you worship and the clan you belong to? President Obama puts to shame our obsolete system that assigns a different set of laws to Mohammed and Elie.

What’s worse, our system is enshrined in our constitution, the document we are supposed to present to our children as the embodiment of our highest ideals.

Of course, the Obama phenomenon is unique to America, and it would be unfair to single out Lebanon in its shortcomings (not even the great democracies of Europe have produced their Obamas). But that shouldn’t give us a pass: The black man in the White house should give every Lebanese a pause for thought…

The simultaneity is almost comedic. As the Lebanese President hugged and kissed the king of Saudi Arabia, M.P Michel Aoun swiftly set off to cuddle the prince of Persia. Not to be outdone, the Egyptian president promptly summoned the L.F Leader Samir Geagea for his own share of the hug-a-Christian-Lebanese-Leader day.

You could almost hear the Syrian and Jordanian leaders scratching their heads and grumbling that “all the good ones are taken”, wondering whether to settle for second class leaders Like Mr. Frangieh or not.

It boggles your mind to think of who is playing whom. Since an outward conflict between Lebanese Sunnis and Shiaas became taboo (it leads to regional instability, we are told) Lebanese Christians became de-facto proxies, and by extension prized king-makers. Regional leaders have become so transparent you can read right into their heads as they back their horses: “If we tip Lebanese Christians to our side, we control the entire country”. 

Of course, arch-rivals Aoun and Geagea are not complaining. A bone-crushing election is right around the corner and polls say Christian areas are very competitive. Campaign money (or worst, weapons as Mr. Aoun’s surrogates have suggested) could come in handy to both sides at this junction.

March 14 will protest that Mr. Suleimen, the ‘unity President’, should not be lumped with the rest of the players in this narrative. They say that Saudi Money is going straight to the coffers of the Lebanese State, not into the pockets of shady politicians. They may have a point, but they are unlikely to convince the opposition whose essential complain, remember, was that Mr. Hariri has a l’état c’est moi mentality…

The bad news: This will take effect in 2013.

Read more…

So how different is a rectangular table from a round one? Very different.

A round-table is an egalitarian setting where those who are taking place are given equal importance. Depending on your point of view, the non-polar arrangement can either symbolize equality or an insolvable gridlock.

A rectangular table on the other hand, like the one that will be used tomorrow, is a polar setting in which two parties face each other, and a judge –in this case the President– chairs and arbitrates their exchange. 

In form at least, tomorrow’s non-round table will be a small victory for those who seek the supremacy of the state, and a setback for those who thrive on anarchy and gridlock.

Here is one of my favorite paragraphs, from his visit to the LF.

We park outside the local LF headquarters. On top of the buildings are two immense crosses. There is an urgency to Christianity here; I feel as if Christ died a few weeks ago and the word is spreading.

“This is the border.” A tattooed man guarding the door points to the end of the street. A giant wall painting of Nabih Berry, the Shia speaker of Parliament and an ally of Hizbullah, stares back at me. We can hear the call to prayer. “There are the Shia.”

[..]

Lebanese food is almost never bad, but the conversation makes for a strange meal. At one moment my companion is laughing about how he doesn’t like the dirty, stupid, smelly Shia Muslims who live over the road. Ten minutes later he is earnestly telling me how he has many good friends among them and it’s only the leadership he doesn’t like.

He begins what seems like a rant against Israel, which ends up with him announcing his respect for the Israeli army and how he expects Israeli troops to be operating in Beirut very shortly. His frequent toilet breaks allow me to gather my thoughts. It seems the long-standing identity conflict of the Lebanese Christians continue in the minds of even the most committed LF supporters. Then he turns the conversation turns to that traveller’s classic: “Don’t you think my country has the best girls?”

Read the entire thing..

Back in the days of Hariri the father, a young woman who taught Computer Sciences in the American University of Beirut asked for a meeting with “Sheikh Rafik”. They had never met her before, but he granted her the meeting.” Hi, my name is Ghenwa Jalloul”, the woman told him. “I just want to tell you that I’m a big admirer of yours, and this is my (impressive) CV. I would like to help”.

Impressed by her boldness, seeing in her an embodiment of his vision of Lebanon and eager to flex his political muscles, Mr. Hariri surprised everyone and put the unknown woman in his electoral list in Beirut. Mrs. Jalloul became an M.P. since then, but could this be about to change?

Years later, Hariri’s son Saad is facing a much trickier electoral landscape than his father’s. He must build his alliances wisely and chose his MPs very carefully. In today’s Lebanon, people like Ghenwa Jalloul who are loyal but lack independent support can prove to be liabilities. The days where his father could just plant anyone he likes seem so far away. Yet, unlike say Dr. Ghattas Koury, the popular lady M.P. could prove tricky to put aside.

Enter Mr. Jumblat, who out of the blue yesterday decided to deliver a stinging public criticism of Mrs. Jalloul, for simple electoral rhetoric that no one should take seriously. Significantly, the Future Movement did not rush to defend her, and Mrs. Jalloul herself remained mum.

The question is: Is Mr. Jumblat freelancing and aiming for her replacement seat? Or is he simply doing Mr. Hariri’s dirty work? Only time can tell, but it is safe to say that we can expect more acts of political “cannibalism” from now until the elections.

It must be the sugar. Or maybe the caffeine. Or perhaps the slow news. But for some reason these days, I am not finding the energy to pounce on lebanese news items and toy around with them in this blog as frequently as you’re used to. 

Instead, for now, I will use this space to wish you all a fruitful - and with any luck energetic- Ramadan.