From Beirut to the Beltway

Lebanon plays Mission Impossible (updated)

In the country of extremes, optimism quickly turns into pessimism, and reality bites those who, for a few seconds, thought the French and the Maronite Church had stumbled upon a magic formula. As I feared, the French-initiated process has hit a wall, mainly because the Maronites on both sides of the political conflict found themselves forced to give in everything, in return for nothing. Aoun is still unwilling to give up his nomination, despite the flurry of western diplomats who have been begging him to reconsider in return for a greater say in the makeup of the new government.

As for the Christians of March 14, many of whom saw their colleagues killed this past year, they see the election of one of their own as a right they earned with blood. Not to mention, as presidential candidate Boutros Harb stated today, their belief that Berri and Hariri do not and should not have the right to choose the president, denying the majority MPs the constitutional right to vote for their own choice. Clearly upset that the current negotiations between Berri and Hariri will end his presidential aspirations, Harb said he didn't like the stance of Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema, who was in Beirut Saturday, saying that the Italian diplomat "does not understand our situation more than we do", and adding that D'Alema and other envoys are more concerned about their troops in the south. Here's Harb's statement in Arabic, as reported in An-Nahar.

ونفى حرب معرفته بمحتوى اللائحة التي وضعها البطريرك الماروني قائلا "لن اتصل، انا الماروني، ولم اتصل بالشيخ سعد الحريري او بالرئيس نبيه بري لسؤالهما اذا كانت اللائحة تتضمن اسمي". واضاف "نحن فوضنا الى النائب الحريري التفاوض مع ممثل المعارضة الرئيس نبيه بري، لكن للتفويض حدودا لا تبلغ حد الاختيار من دون العودة للتشاور معنا". وقال "ان اعطاءهما الحق في اختيار اسم الرئيس هو الغاء لدور مجلس النواب وتعطيل للحياة الديموقراطية".
واضاف "لا يمكن ان يأتي رئيس من خارج القوى الموجودة في البلاد، ان في 14 آذار او في المعارضة".
وابدى عدم رضاه عن الاتصالات الجارية. وقال "انا لا ازور احدا لان تاريخي ومواقفي معروفة ولست في حاجة الى التعريف بها".
وختم "انا احب ايطاليا، والمأكولات الايطالية، لكن مواقف وزير الخارجية الايطالي لم تعجبني، وهو لا يعرف واقعنا اكثر منا، وهو وغيره من الموفدين لا يخافون علينا بقدر ما يخافون على قواتهم الموجودة في الجنوب".

What Harb is saying that no one has the right to kill off his candidacy, especially not an Italian diplomat (or French) who thinks he is doing the country a favor by urging a compromise that is essentially unconstitutional and undemocratic.

These inevitable complications were well known to everyone, especially Hizbullah, which, though much of the process is being played by its rules, is banking on Aoun's uncompromising stance and has said it will not support a candidate not approved by its Christian ally. This makes you think that the Assad regime does not even need to resort to assassinations at this time, for Aoun's position and the unrealistic solutions being proposed seem to be taking care of business.

The list itself is a nonstarter. The names leaked to the press include the following: Boutros Harb, Nassib Lahoud, Michel Aoun, Michel Khoury, Robert Ghanem and Michel Edde. A seventh name is said to be the central bank governor, Riad Salameh. Hizbullah and its allies have reportedly vetoed Harb, Lahoud, Ghanem and Khoury, leaving March 14 with Edde (both sides are undecided on Salameh). According to most Lebanese dailies, March 14 Christians rejected Edde, and feel that Khoury's presidency, who heads the Maronite league and is the son of Lebanon's first post-independence president, is the minimum they are willing to accept. Salameh's candidacy, according to al-Akhbar, upset Michel Suleiman, who was quoted as saying that others should respect the constitution as he did, in reference to Salameh being a civil servant who is not allowed to run for president (Salameh reportedly produced a legal study arguing that he could run). An-Nahar said that the addition of Salameh's name prompted the "opposition" to demand the addition of Suleiman's to the list, even though March 14 rejected the army commander's nomination a long time ago.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner returned to Beirut Sunday night, saying he was now "less confident", and speaking of unexpected "new alliances" that changed the equation, possibly in reference to the disgruntlement of March 14 Christians, and Aoun's refusal to compromise. Al-Akhbar reported strong disagreement between the Hariri camp and Geagea, who feels that Hariri is selling out to Hizbullah. This may very well be propaganda, for Hariri to this point is still consulting with his Christian allies. However, by restricting choices to this list, he has, perhaps due to lack of other peaceful choices, forced his allies to play by the "opposition's" rules. Further complicating the picture is a rumored agreement between Aoun and Geagea (who have been exchanging envoys) to reject the current process of naming a candidate. They might not agree on whom to elect, but they agree on how not to elect.

It's mission impossible for Kouchner and his European diplomat friends over the next couple of days. Sadly, while the international community is in a hurry to settle this crisis, the Assad regime is not. The attention it is receiving as a power broker was just what the regime's doctor ordered.  Call it "pressure", if you like. But some might see it as undeserved recognition.

Here, I remember an interview Saad Hariri gave to Now Lebanon a few days ago. The following part is especially relevant, given the amount of compromising March 14 is being asked to make today:

I think that March 14 was a day that the Lebanese people said what they wanted, and the Lebanese politicians didn’t understand.  It was a day where we should have all sacrificed a little bit for each other, and we should have done more.  Because we can’t say that we didn’t make any mistakes.  We did make mistakes after the 14th of March.  We didn’t believe that the 14th of March would be the 14th of March, and the Cedar Revolution would be this magnitude of people believing in Lebanon. March 14 was the day where the Lebanese took pride – not only in Lebanon, but everywhere in the world, every Lebanese was proud of being Lebanese. You know, we always have an identity crisis in Lebanon.  But the 14th of March, that day, we implanted that identity into Lebanese hearts and minds and people were proud of being Lebanese, and proud of holding the Lebanese flag. We can’t say that we didn’t make any mistakes.

I think we should have sacrificed much more.  We made fatal mistakes not protecting that day, and not understanding the magnitude of what that whole day was all about, and what people expected from that day.  You have General Aoun, now on the other side, who was part of the 14th of March.  You can’t deny this, and you shouldn’t deny this.  We should persevere in getting him back.  Because March 14 is like a painting that is missing one of its parts.  It was a perfect picture of Lebanon, and that picture – we didn’t know how to protect it.  We should have protected it by compromising, by understanding each other much more.  We should have put our political ambitions aside.

I don't know about you, but I don't understand how you can protect a country by compromising so much, after so many "mistakes", and so much bloodshed.

Update. Kouchner is amazed. France is amazed (h/t Mustapha).

"Everybody was agreed (on the process). Everybody said they had agreed. Now I'm amazed, France is amazed, that something is stuck, something is blocked, something is derailed, and I would like everyone to assume their responsibilities," a visibly angry Kouchner said after meeting majority leader Saad al-Hariri.

"I would like to know who is not in agreement. I would like to know who has an interest in chaos, who has an interest in the elections not taking place, who has an interest in making it even more complicated for the life of all the Lebanese," Kouchner said. (Reuters)

Here's the funnier part.

Kouchner said that even the Syrians had agreed on the French-proposed mechanism for choosing the president.

Update 2. Geagea after meeting Kouchner denied reports about tense relations with Saad Hariri, saying  the latter was negotiating in the name of the alliance, and adding that March 14 alliance was "fine". He said March 14 accepted 4 names on the list, but "they're trying to impose one candidate on us".

Speaking to reporters, Kouchner said he didn't believe there will be an election on Wednesday, and called on Syria to "stop being an impediment". The French FM added that the Maronite patrirach must come up with a solution(!).

Meanwhile, Michel Aoun has upped the ante, declaring parliament and the cabinet illegitimate, and himself the only consensus candidate. He said the new president has to have legal and moral influence to solve "two main issues, Hizbullah's weapons and the international resolutions". He blamed the bad political situation on the "illegitimate government" that is "receiving unconditional support" and continues to "steal".

A glimmer of hope

Lebanese were told to be optimistic today. Days before parliament is set to elect (or not) a president, Lebanese politicians seem to have inched closer to producing a short list of "consensus candidates", despite the noise coming from the Palestinian camps. Saad Hariri heads the list of optimists, saying that a breakthrough is possible. An unlikely bearer of hope was Aoun's elections ally Michel Murr, who declared that he and many of Aoun's deputies will head to parliament if there is a consensus candidate, even if it's not Aoun. Another quasi ally of Aoun, Zahle MP Elie Skaff, made a similar statement. Murr's statement came as Jumblatt and Geagea both appeared willing to take the Bkirki-Hariri-Berri route to the election, with Jumblatt phoning Berri to express support for the process, and Geagea declaring his support for the French-sponsored efforts to hold an election.

This optimism was punctured by a statement by Hizbullah's number 2 Naim Qassem, who launched an attack on Saad Hariri accusing him of trying to market American demands. However, Qassem said Hizbullah would agree with the Christian consensus led by Bkirki. And earlier on Friday, Hizbullah's Nawaf al-Moussawi said his militia had handed the name of its nominee to Sfeir and to France's envoy, Jean-Claude Cousseran.

In details, Cousseran announced that Berri and Hariri have received a list from the patriarch containing a number of candidates. Media reports put the number of candidates between 6 and 12. Berri told Radio Monte Carlo that up to 3 names could be sent on Wednesday to parliament, depending on the level of agreement.

The list has not been made public. You'll find several versions in Lebanese newspapers, if you're interested.

Here's to hoping against hope, despite all my reservations and skepticism. And here's to Aoun biting the dust. What else can we say, or hope for...   

What's a list without a stick?

Two days ago, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner wished Lebanese politicians "good luck" in figuring out how to elect a president before the constitutional deadline ends next week. Supposedly, he set in motion a "mechanism", charging the partriarch with the task of nominating candidates and Berri/Hariri with selecting one or two for the vote.

We still don't know whether the patriarch's secret list saw the light, or was dead on arrival as some suggested. Regardless, it was fiercely opposed by Michel Aoun, who today blasted it for containing candidates who are not of his caliber, and attacked Saad Hariri for not accepting his candidacy. The Lebanese forces did not warm up to the idea either, hinting that the responsibility of electing a president should not be shifted from parliament to the Maronite church. 

In any case, and this perhaps partly explains the patriarch's initial hesitation, a Bkirki list will not change the plans of Michel Aoun, Hizbullah and the Assad regime. Aoun today made it clear that he will boycott the session to elect a president if he is not the only candidate running.  Nasrallah is reportedly discussing the lineup of the second government with Assad regime lackey Suleiman Frangieh.  And Syrian-installed Emile Lahoud has already declared any such list "unconstitutional". As for the Assad regime, they have already predicted failure for the French initiative.

The French wanted to use the Maronite church's authority to lebanonize the process and shield it from foreign intervention. However, the church, as the French should have known, is not immune to Syrian intervention, and cannot impose a solution, especially when Sarkozy is unwilling to put measurable pressure on the Assad regime. The Lebanese need more than "good luck". They need a miracle the  Maronite church cannot perform.

Report: Hizbullah to install Aoun as prime minister

Now Lebanon reports that Hizbullah is pressuring Syrian-installed Emile Lahoud to appoint Michel Aoun as head of a transitional government based in Baabda, after securing an agreement with Aoun. Now Lebanon claims the move aims to shield Hizbullah from having to use military force or appear as a side to a conflict that would then appear as between Christians as opposed to Sunnis vs. Shias.

In his speech on Sunday, Hizbullah asked Lahoud for a "rescue" initiative to save the country from the hands of "thieves and killers". Hizbullah envoys have been visiting Lahoud to reportedly discuss measures to prevent the election of a March 14 president.

Michel Aoun has recently threatened via Hizbullah's airwaves to form a "resistance movement" against the Siniora government, vowing that an "alternate government will be soon established, and we will not allow the election of a president with a simple majority."

He also noted that President Emile Lahoud still has the choice to hand over power to a government committed to safeguarding national unity. “Why are they rejecting my candidacy, especially since I represent more than two-thirds of Christians?” asked Aoun.

“If we do not reach a democratic and constitutional solution, there will be a resistance movement against the government,” Aoun warned. Yet he rejected any intention of invading the Grand Serail.

He also noted that the role of the army is to protect the people, not a regime that violates the constitution.

The army reference is interesting, as Now Lebanon reported that army commander Michel Suleiman told Aoun that the army is "not a militia" and that it will follow a single authority, not two. If the Now Lebanon report is true, Aoun would have the support of Lahoud's presidential guard, whose head is languishing in detention for complicity in the Hariri assassination.

Aoun tried a similar scenario in 1989 and ended up a political exile in France. Is he aspiring for a prolonged stay in Damascus?

Nasrallah stops short of calling for jihad against Lebanese government

Nasrallah has appealed to Syrian-installed puppet Emile Lahoud to embark on a "national rescue initiative" so that the country does not fall into the hands of "thieves and murderers who are followers of the American-Zionist project".

Nasrallah said his militia will not recognize a president elected outside the "consensus", and will consider him an "usurper". He added that the presidential election is important because it will determine the role of the army and government in the next period. He said no force on earth can disarm his militia, and that last week's exercises were a "message to the world that the resistance can create a victory that can "alter the face of the region".

Nasrallah also warned against privatizing cell phone companies-- which Siniora's government is trying to do-- threatening future bidders that his Iranian-owned militia will "confront them using legal and legitimate means". Nasrallah, who represents a privatized version of Shia Islam, has his own phone network, and prefers to keep his wiretapping operation undisturbed by giving new licenses or modernizing the service in the land of do as you like.

He also called for early elections, and vowed to accept the result of that election and give the current "fake majority" the right to elect a president if they win two thirds of the seats. He said he considers the results of the last parliamentary elections invalid, because the deputies who allied themselves with Hizbullah during the election have not honored their campaign promise of rejecting UNSC 1559 and protecting the "weapons of the resistance".

Nasrallah denied rumors of impending clashes erupting between Hizbullah and armed elements in the refugee camps near the southern suburbs. The rumors are, mind you, are being propagated by Damascus-based PFLP-GC leader Ahmad Gibril.

The speech, delivered on the occasion of "Martyr's Day", is full of lies and hypocritical claims as usual. It's safe to say that Hizbullah now equates the current Lebanese government and March 14 leaders with the Israeli government. That he hasn't called for jihad against the government seems to be a matter of time. It makes you wonder on what basis Hariri and Berri are meeting. Does Hariri really think he can reach an agreement with people who consider him to be a Zionist thief and murderer?

A transcript (Arabic) of the speech is here.

A democratic choice outside democracy

This is what the French are marketing in Lebanon and Syria: a mechanism by which the Maronite patriarch names 5 presidential candidates, who would then be reduced to two by Hariri and Berri, before parliament convenes to choose one.

According to al-Hayat, Sarkozy's envoy was in Lebanon seeking "guarantees" that the said mechanism would "succeed", having reached an agreement with Syrian President Bashar Assad to facilitate the election of the president (by allowing Berri to convene parliament).

The problem, according to al-Hayat, is that both Michel Aoun and many in March 14 (except Hariri) think it's a lousy idea, because, they believe, it's not the church's job to nominate presidents. The patriarch himself seems to be hesitant, not wanting to produce a list for the consumption of non-Christians.

We'd be wasting our time if we started analyzing the hesitation of Sfeir, and even the constitutionality of such a move, which anyone should agree it overrides the Lebanese parliament and places faith in foreign intentions. For, and as An-Nahar reported the whole initiative depends on the good intentions of Bashar Assad (An-Nahar described it as a "test" for the regime). Will he or won't he let the Christians' choices reach parliament? Of course, just formulating it as such suggests ignorance. For the Assad regime knows very well that the Christians can never agree on a candidate, let alone a list to be distilled by Berri and Hariri. Aoun and others have been making sure a consensus could never be reached.  Geagea is right when he quoted the patriarch as saying that some are using Bkirki as an excuse, falsely pinning all hopes on the church's choice when the solution could not be more obvious: go to parliament, and choose a candidate there.   

Starting Monday, the world will converge on Lebanon to pressure the Lebanese to agree on a list of candidates, Sarkozy style (sadly, not French style, for that is not French democracy we see here). Also on Monday, a session to elect a president will probably not take place, awaiting the terrorist to pass a test he failed many times. Somewhere along the way, in between assassinations and mass terror, much of the world forgot that for democracy to work, democratic choices need to be made.

Hizbullah's exercises and stale French croissants

Hizbullah has confirmed that it carried out "nonmilitary" exercises south and north of the Litani, allegedly to prepare for an Israeli attack scenario. According to Hizbullah's second in command Naim Qassem, the exercises were in response to an Israeli drill involving more than 50,000 soldiers.  Al-Hayat quoted a Hizbullah official as saying the exercises were a "deterrent message" to the "Israeli enemy" which has been violating Lebanese airspace without incurring a response from the Lebanese government. 

Qassem's confirmation came after PM Siniora and UNIFIL denied the Hizbullah exercises took place, with Siniora claiming they were likely a "simulation on paper" taking place "indoors". Hizbullah officials say the Lebanese and UNIFIL did not see them because the fighters weren't carrying any weapons. Somehow, the Lebanese military missed thousands of fighters simulating combat, despite eyewitness accounts to the contrary. The Lebanese authorities seem programmed to ignore any showing by Hizbullah, as long as weapons are not visible to the unassuming public.

Al-Akhbar, which first "broke" the story, claimed the exercises were personally led by Nasrallah, and claimed they were "a defensive operation in case of an all-out Israeli war on Lebanon... or an Israeli aggression on Syria".

Hizbullah justified this alleged show of strength by claiming the Lebanese government had not responded to Israeli exercises along the border, leaving them with no choice but to prepare for a possible Israeli attack. Nsrallah reportedly wanted to send a message  "to both friends and foes", that Hizbullah is ready in case of an attack.

At the same time Hizbullah was indirectely boasting of its powers to defend itself and the Assad regime, As-Safir, a pro-syrian publication, was quoting the head of UNIFIL as saying UNIFIL would withdraw in four months if an agreement was not reached on the president, something denied by UNIFIL.

With Hizbullah "prepared" to take on the Israelis, and in place to partition Lebanon, it suddenly appeared as if the plan to get rid of UNIFIL and UNSC 1701 was starting to show promise. This leaves little doubt that with every killing of a March 14 leader, and every blow to the majority or government, Hizbullah becomes stronger and inches closer to winning its existential battle. Failure to elect a president or a two-government scenario work well for the party, which functions best in chaos.

It's also a slap in the face of those who think the Lebanese crisis will end by offering incentives to the Assad regime "5 times", to quote French FM Bernard Kouchner, who has been talking to and sending emissaries to the Assad regime. Instead of tightening the noose, or at least impose financial sanctions by freezing the accounts of the regime's financers and cohorts, the French keep delivering verbal "warnings",  unwittingly empowering the Assad regime, which revels in recognition as a power broker in Lebanon. Instead of recognizing the regime as a terrorist force that needs to be punished (and not just talked to), Sarkozy's people are hoping to transform terrorists into good guys by offering them stale croissants.  It's amazing to this blogger that the French believe their "pressure" on the regime will pay off if they promised them normalization of ties. Unless they offer them amnesty from prosecution in the Hariri case, the Assad regime will not be interested. And who, exactly, told them they could assume Hizbullah is completely controlled by the Assad regime?

No wonder some in March 14 are pondering an election in Beit Eddine. That's if Hariri is kept in the loop, and the fires don't ravage it first.

Aoun, Hariri and the Hizbullah challenge

The Aoun-Hariri meetings in Paris may be shrouded in secrecy, but they have at least injected some hope, even if that is part delusion. The "summit", as An-Nahar called it, has led some to suspend their disbelief for a day or two, noting "progress" and hoping for a breakthrough. The French and Americans are reportedly working behind the scenes to facilitate this meeting, especially after the Assad regime rejected the latest French-coated carrot. It seems Aoun is being offered one last chance, before March 14 resorts to picking a president outside the "consensus", a move that will likely receive wide international support.

Speaking of carrots, Hizbullah, obviously not happy that its Christian cover is shaking hands with the enemy, has suddenly named Michel Aoun as its candidate, after much hesitation and refusal to publicly back his candidacy. The timing of the announcement suggests that Hizbullah is afraid of losing its Christian cover, so it has, yet again, dangled the presidency carrot before Aoun, in hopes he falls for it again.

March 14 media is claiming that Saad Hariri will try to persuade Aoun to drop his candidacy, in return for a say in the identity of the president. It is not clear how Aoun will respond if that is indeed the objective of the talks. It is clear, however, that Aoun is being presented with a golden opportunity to redeem himself and disassociate himself from the Syrian-Iranian line. If the reports are true about Hizbullah's involvement in the assassination of March 14 leaders, then Aoun cannot afford to keep alienating his natural allies, despite the shortcomings he singles them out for. Aoun has already been betrayed by Hizbullah, when it became clear that they were not serious about supporting his candidacy, and are only using him to weaken the Christians politically. The next assassination will be different and lead to different reactions, especially given Hizbullah's reported role in amassing intelligence for the killers and possibly facilitating the murders. Does Aoun really want to be one of Hizbullah's proxies when all hell breaks loose?

Hizbullah has been preparing for a coup since last year's war with Israel weakened its support among the non-Shia. This blogger is not convinced they are interested in a compromise, or in stopping a civil war. They have now boosted their numbers in downtown Beirut, near Siniora's headquarters, and have armed elements ready for action. For that, a strangely timed announcement by Amin Gemayel that he reached an agreement with Berri and Hizbullah over a "mechanism to reach an agreement over one of the proposed initiatives" seems like an exercise in denial. Of course, the Hariri-Aoun talks could also be an exercise in futility. But at least they could, if successful, help deal a blow to Hizbullah's "strategy" to take over the country.