Hariri: no dialogue under Hizbullah's weapons

Future Movement leader Saad Hariri said that there will be no dialogue under the threat of Hizbullah's weapons, and vowed to never surrender to Iran and Syria. He said all sects are depressed over what happened, including the Shias in the south, who saw Hizbullah invade the very homes that welcomed them during Israeli aggression.

He said the army will be held accountable at a later date, adding that "they" will monitor its commitment to maintaining civil peace through the cabinet. He acknowledged that the military failed to protect citizens, adding it was the citizens themselves who ended up defending its unity.

He said any dialogue should have the security of the country and Hizbullah's weapons as a top item. He also said that Hizbullah's monopoly over "war and peace decisions" will no longer be acceptable.

Hariri confirmed that the cabinet will revoke the two decisions, but accused Hizbullah of using it as an excuse to implement a regional plot to take over the country, suggesting that Israel might have given the green light for Hizbullah to move troops across Lebanese territory towards Beirut and the mountain, as part of the Syrian-Israeli negotiations.

Hariri defended his decision not to fight in Beirut, saying that the Future Movement was not founded to carry weapons and conduct wars.

Update. I obviously could not capture everything he said. More here and in the comments section. I'm going away on a business trip, so blogging will be sporadic this week. Thanks to all for reading!

Comments

[JoseyWales]

He should have said that 2 years ago, but we're used to all our idiots being behind the curve.

QUOTE:He [Saad] said the army will be held accountable at a later date ENDQUOTE

Again, I understand it is a tricky time but ACCOUNTABILITY always comes "later" which in Lebanon means never ever.

Enough, to hell with all of these clowns, my ass has more credibility than these people.

[bint ras-beyrouth]

I thought his speech was good - you have to remember the context of local consumption, he's talking to his constituency, not to fancy-schmancy expats. Two very serious issues here: his charging Israel with 'enabling' the movement of troops towards the capital (who's the traitor now, punk? kind of accusation); and his insistence of not glossing over the sunni-shi'a fitna. Besides what his speechwriter prepared for him, this last point seemed to be the one thing he was focused on.
But what do I know?

[Doha]

AK,

Hariri also said that the Sunni-Shiite conflict has become a reality (al fitna). He also added that if the Arab League envoys are not aided by the Lebanese factions in reaching a settlement, civil war will ensue and Hizbullah will be responsible for this. As a moderate force, the Future Movement can help calm the situation so much but if no settlement is reached, the movement will not be able to control the Sunni streets.

Interestingly, when asked, he said that the Future Movement does not want foreign intervention (re: USS Cole); Hariri has put his faith in the Arab League to help bring about a settlement. That's an important point!

[naja]

Actually, bint ras-beyrouth (hey! fellow constituent!) I personally thought that the "israeli enabling the movement of troops towards the capital" was the weak point in an otherwise impeccable address by one who is after all a novice, as he managed to mix emotional and rational in equal measures. As for "not glossing over the "fitna", I am with you. At a time when fundamentalist sunnis are thinking of using the HA actions as an excuse for Iraq-like stupidities, thank god someone is facing reality rather than masking it under the usual hypocritical slogans. I am genuinely afraid of sunnis using their resentment to justify a deep-seated mistrust of all things shia. Only by facing facts can that be overcome.

[Bad Vilbel]

I'm not sure what you guys are celebrating hariri's speech for.

1. "Michel Suleiman is still the consensus candidate for president."
These guys never learn, do they, even after he betrayed them, failed at his job and duty, and committed treason, they still want him as prez.

2. Hariri confirmed that the 2 government decisions are being revoked. So HA gets to "win" this one and get their way, as usual.

3. "No Dialogue under HA weapons". That's right. Why bother dialoguing? Just do what HA tells you to do without complaining next time. (See point #2).

If you guys are proud of this speech, then you deserve all the stupidity you're getting from such failed leaders.

[Doha]

BV,

Despite all that has happened, we still see a moderate sort of speech coming from Hariri. That has to be commended and yes it makes Hizbullah look belligerent. In that moderate speech there was masked important messages, an important one was the allegation that HA did what it did under an Israeli cover, part of a series of negotations between Syria and Israel. That allegation is not to be dismissed. HA for the first time is being portrayed as an accomplice.

I keep on thinking about what is required from the FM? They've been a moderate force and have never changed their message.

[Amir in Tel Aviv]

Defiance is good.
Only if you have battalions covering your back.
.

[bint ras-beyrouth]

I thought that insisting on a message of moderation (eg the FM militia is made up of the kids we sent to college, not given them weapons for fighting; what more proof do you need that we're not armed; etc...) was brilliant - and very consistent. I know it's hard to believe in a leader who urges you NOT to fight, but change has to start somewhere. This new generation of Lebanese who wants to believe in change, who wants to have a chance to live a normal life, deserves this stance of refusing the dog fight. Democracy is not built overnight, but fought for in more ways than one.
BV, if you grew up in Lebanon during the 75-90 war like I did, you would find it easier to accept a call to moderation, rather than the usual eye-for-an-eye vendettas we know so well. If you have children like I do, your worst nightmare would be to see them living your own nightmare, and your father's before you and his father before - I say father because honestly there is a bit too much penile measuring here.
Naja, I will always be bint Ras-Beyrouth, even though I've now lived longer outside Lebanon than inside :-). I agree with you completely that the Israeli conspiracy bit was the weakest point, but considering the topsy-turvy logic of all the rethoric coming from the other side, them are fighting words, no?
Doha, yes, kudos for refusing to be a hypocrite - and that's what I love about this new generation of Lebanese, they're mostly not afraid to call a spade a spade - but honestly, this scares the poop out of me.

[Bad Vilbel]

Guys,

Let's be honest here. Every politician and their sister blames Israel for the other side's actions. This accusation that Israel somehow gave "permission" to HA is silly and it makes Hariri sound like the idiot he is (like they all are).

I wish for once we'd get that bogeyman mentality out of our discussions.

Every fucking time something goes wrong, everyone is so quick to work Israel into the discussion, to score some kind of point.

Hariri's accusation here is nothing but the usual pandering. And about as worthy of discussion as Nassrallah's constant talk of Siniora being an Israeli agent.

[Bad Vilbel]

PS:

I am all for the call to moderation. That was not my beef with Hariri's speech.

[naja]

Topsy-turvy indeed, bint ras-beyrouth. And do I detect an expat in the UK? But if one makes a virtue of not lowering themselves to the language of arms, they should treat the actual language equally. Moot point, I know, but from one who holds a - most likely, naive - opinion that if you are in the caravan, don't bark back at the dogs.

[Bad Vilbel]

bint ras-beyrouth,

I did grow up in the 70s and 80s in West Beirut. And I quite familiar with everything you're saying. And I am all for moderation. Do not mistake my calling a spade a spade for some sort of bloodthirsty vendetta. I am not interested in vendettas. I am interested in a secular, modern, civil society.

I simply am tired of the stupid cliches (including the "Israel must have something to do with it" song and dance), and I am tired with politicians not owning up to their promises. And I'm pointing those promises out. When Hariri says he will not back down to guns, but in the next sentence confirms that the government is revoking the 2 decisions, I find his words kinda hard to believe.

[bint ras-beyrouth]

All evidence to the contrary, Hariri is no idiot - neither are all the other idiots. Don't take this swipe at HA's link to the "ennemy" at simple face value or just one more insult levelled at them. This is not what you're calling the usual pandering - I think it is far more telling, and far more serious. Don't forget how very grave it is in our culture to accuse someone of somehting like that. No one in Hariri's position would make such a mistake, however stupid you may believe him to be. This is not a spontaneous outburst, this is a planned, prepared, carefully written speech - accompanied by a great performance (I am not naive, I can identify populist pandering too).

[Vox P,]

...and battalions we shall get. This party ain't over, there will be more militiamen in Lebanon in 6 months than in the whole of Iraq.

[bint ras-beyrouth]

Addendum: Except for Wa'im, he is an idiot.
Naja, see? i'm psychic, I answered before reading your second comment, and no I'm not in the UK
BV, yes, of course I know we are hoping for the same things for that place we love and hate equally - otherwise, why are we here discussing the sex of angels and being so spitting angry about every little detail?

[Bad Vilbel]

"19:28 Lebanese Forces' leader Samir Geagea after meeting with British Ambassador: I received information that does not reassure me or make me optimistic about the methods or the role of the Arab Ministerial Committee in trying to end the crises"

Whatdyaknow....interesting.

[JoseyWales]

...I received information that does not reassure me...

Yes BV, I got the same info, without the help of the Brit ambassador, just from staring at my coffee grounds... ;)

On a related subject Nayla Mouawad is complaining somewhere that the West has let M14 down, boo hooo hoooo

[Arthur Dent]

BV,

I'm an avid non-Lebanese guest reader of this blog, so allow me to ask a couple of questions pertaining your first comment on this post.

1) Given the fact that Suleiman failed, do you see any other presidential candidate who might have the (wobbly) confidence of all Lebanese?

2) Do you see an alternative to war, ie. is war avoidable?

Thanks (to you all)!

[LebExile]

I think that the most suitable president would be Samir Geagea. He has shown that he can be cool headed, is strong if he needs to be and has most of the christians behind him.

but then again - that's just my opinion!

[Jeanne]

The choice of interlocutors that the Qatar-led Arab League delegation will meet is curious (besides the fact that Qatar is very much pro-Syrian). It looks like a mediation between 8 and 14 March but it may not be that at all. Berri and Nasrallah are one and the same, ditto of Siniora and Hariri (Saida, Saudi interests),and then the Maronites. Sleiman is not 14-March and Gemayel, before being a member of 14-March is mainly the leader of the Kataeb/LF. Will they try to persuade him to hand over willingly these organizations' centers to the Army to ward off further bloodshed?

[ghassan karam]

Scratch the surface and Lebanese will not disappoint, they will immediately become tribal:-) This is a discussion that will not be very productive but note how is it that the qualification for the Presidency of a country has nothing to do with ideas, commitment, character, patriotism ... It is enough that one belongs to a tribe. Being Christian is more important than being Lebanese and if one is judged to be cool headed then history and baggage be damned. We keep proving it everyday, "Lebanon is a country with no citizens" (Blad bidoon Sha'ab). Maybe there is something in our genes?

[Solomon2]

I'm not sure Suleiman failed, because he considers that the L.A. has a different mission, one he considers more congruent with Lebanon's true nature: http://solomon2.blogspot.com/2008/05/lebanon-consociate-not-democracy.html (just updated).

[Bad Vilbel]

Suleiman failed by absolutely any standard applied to an army commander in any civilized country. The only reason you guys are still debating whether he failed or not is because this is Lebanon, i.e. alternate reality.

Suleiman was given an order by his civilian boss, the cabinet, to institute a state of emergency.,He refused to obey that order. In any normal country, that's grounds for court martial, dereliction of duty, and maybe treason.
On top of that, his SOLE job, as army commander, is to protect the safety of the citizens of Lebanon and defend the country from agression (be it internal or external). He did nothing while militiamen rampaged through Beirut and lobbed mortars on the Chouf. Even worse, he ordered his troops to pull back on the day the clashes first broke out.

By ANY definition, no matter how lenient, this is a complete and utter failure.

Only in Lebanon do we glance past people's actual job description, and talk about them still being worth leading a country based on their religion, their affiliation, and the notion that "he's a good man".

I hope that answers that question once and for all.

As for the question of who else is suitable? As far as I'm concerned, anyone who hasn't completely failed at his job would be a better candidate. At this point I'd take a Butros Harb or Nassib Lahoud or Charles Rizk (that's assuming I am still restricted by the maronite affiliation requirement. In a non-sectarian ideal world, I'd take someone like Jumblatt who's shown to be 10 times the statesman Suleiman and Saniora combined have been).

[Jay]

To ghassan

I am not sure it's in our genes but rather s the lack of a strong central government with laws at equal distance from every sect. People at a certain level are tribal the world over whenever they feel the State fails them and thus resort to their own communities and tribes to hold their own. Lebanon is not unique in this sense.

I think we should step back and take notice for what just took place the last few days. Whether Sunnis or Druze facing such ravage and armed assault didn't fall back into the old predictable sectarian lines but rather looked up to the Government and the Army to defend them. Granted it's a weak Government and a disgrace of an Army leadership but the politicians never waivered from relying on the State for protection.

I'd say this is a far better cry from yesteryears and a very encouraging sign that citizenship, comradery, and trust are prevailing over tribal instincts.

[ghassan karam]

Solomon2,
I don't believe that there are many who would call Lebanon a functioning democracy. Actually you will find out that most refer to it as feudal, tribal. sectarian and consociate. But you see, this is the Lebanese problematic that consociation belongs to gangs, tribes and organized crime, it is not what civil societies are made of. No wonder law and order have replaced consociation.
You seem to argue that "what is" bestows legitimacy and credibility on a phenomenon when it can be clearly illustrated that "what is" is the real problem and therefore we must endeavour to replace it with what "ought".

[ghassan karam]

Jay,
I welcome the perceptible changes that you allude it. I have highlighted that point in my latest essay on Yalibnan.com /Podcast. But my above remark was a tongue in cheek in reaction to LebExile who jumps at the opportunity to nominate Geagea to the Lebanese Presidency because he has "cool control" and "the support of most of the Christians". Is it enough to have Christian support when one is expected to govern over the whole country? How do we know that he has the majority of Christian support? and isn't time that we push the nomination of a person based on her commitment to Lebanon rather than her church?

[Macemuscle]

BV,

It's hard to agree with your point on the extent of the Army's and Suleiman's failures, and that not recognizing the magnitude of this failure is a unique Lebanese problem...

Didn’t the U.S. military, supposedly the most powerful in the world, just sit there and watch while Bagdad was being looted and old scores were being settled (i.e., people getting massacred)? Aren’t they sitting by and watching today, now and everyday as the Iraqis decent into a murderous civil war?

Didn’t the UN sit there and watch while almost a million people were hacked to death in Rawanda?

Didn’t the UN sit and watch while countless atrocities were being committed in the Congo?

Didn’t the US/French/Italian/British “peacekeeping” forces in Lebanon sit and watch Israel massacre Lebanese civilians and the Lebanese Forces commit the Sabra and Chatila massacres? Didn’t they later on sit and watch Amal, Hezbollah, PSP etc rearm and take over West Beirut?

Come on be a bit realistic here!!! I know it is very frustrating for the Lebanese on both side see the Army sit and watch (including watching SSPN members massacred by FM gunmen in Tripoli)… But if we can’t expect the great armies of the west to be superheros, how can we expect it of the Lebanese army???

I think the question we should all be asking is when, for example, the pro-government fighters are being asked to surrender their weapons to the Lebanese army, why aren’t the opposition fighters being asked the same… I think THAT was a big whole in the M14 speeches we’ve been hearing over the last few hours…

[Bad Vilbel]

Mace,

As far as i know the US invasion of Iraq was deemed a FAILURE. Many of the generals in charge have been held accountable. And the US administration itself is going to be held accountable by the electorate in November.

The UN standing by idle while Rwandans were massacred was also unanimously designated as a FAILURE. The UN Sec. Gen at the time even APOLOGIZED for the UN's FAILURE in that matter.

So you've proven my point by listing more failures.

I am not expecting anyone to be a superhero. I am expecting people to do the job they signed up for. And when they don't, I am in my full right to call them FAILURES and to demand they be replaced at their jobs by someone more competent.

Last I checked, the people in charge of the Iraq war are NOT being rewarded for their failures. So why should we reward Suleiman by making him president?

Your argument makes no sense whatsoever other than to prove my point.

I do agree with your last point though. I have been wondering myself why HA is not being asked to surrender its weapons like the PSP and Future have. In theory, if the army is to truly take control. That's what should be happening.
But again, the army is biased. It is disarming one side and not the other. Yet another point to add to why I think Suleiman is failing at his job. He's not being impartial and neutral (add that to the list of things i listed earlier). And you guys think THAT's going to make for a neutral president who's supposed to be arbiter between various Lebanese factions? If he can't be neutral and will shirk his duties as army commander, he's probably going to continue being biased and shirking his duties as Prez.

[JoseyWales]

Mace, your analogies don't work here.

The fucking Lebanese army in this case is on its OWN soil, asked to protect its OWN people by its own gvmnt. End of story.

Who is against protecting civilians from armed men? Who is against an open and functioning airport?

What is the army's function? and if it can't do it it has failed, regardless of who failed in Iraq or Rwanda.

Another sign of Lebanese dementia: why are we even talking about those other places???

[Bad Vilbel]

Josey,

Because that's what Lebanese do. Instead of facing their own failures, they point at someone else's failure and go "See? If he can't do it, then why do you expect me to!"

Talk about one of the worst attitudes (collectively speaking) that I have ever encountered.

[Macemuscle]

Sorry but that didn't prove anything:

First of all you didn't respond to all the issues. For example, the Congo failures have yet to be fully acknowledged. Sure the UN apologized to the Rwandan failures. Big f**king deal. Nothing concrete was ever done to bring people to account. As far as I know, Dallaire is still viewed as a hero in Canada because he made a few phone calls to the UN headquarters warning that atrocities were being committed... I'm sure lots of officers made lots of phone calls too in the Lebanese army... What this means is that this type of thing can happen again today under the UN watch and they would be helpless (due to military capability and/or political wiliness) to stop it.

Second, I agree that the US adventure in Iraq and indeed its meddling in the Middle East is a big failure and has been for decades (so it's beyond logic that the Lebanese still see hope in US intervention). But someone forgot to tell it to the American people who have voted Bush to a second term and have a good chance of voting for McCain. Besides what real consequences have the US administration and their neo-con cronies faced for their failures? Record profits for oil and defense companies? Lucrative careers in companies like Halliburton for ex-military types? 15 minutes of fame for the solders that abused Abu Ghraib prisoners instead of court martial? Is that what you call holding them accountable??

What I'm trying to say is that ma 7hadan a7hsan min 7hadan... So quit this fantasy that the grass is greener on the other side... take it from someone who lives on the other side... it is not!!!

[Macemuscle]

No it's called reality check... live in the real world

[Doha]

BV,

I wanted to get back to a point you mentioned early on about how the Lebanese are so good in implicating Israel in everything. Regarding that point, I wanted to say that Hariri's allegation that Hizbullah attacked Beirut, the Bekaa and the Jabal under Israeli cover was to prove a point, which is to remove the "holier than thou" image that Hizbullah always commanded in the eyes of moderate Sunnis and to finally bring down Hizbullah to the level of a political party that can be questioned.

[Macemuscle]

Because it is hard to solve real world problems when you live in fantasy land

[Macemuscle]

Once again some people have to resort to name calling when they are unable to debate the merits of an argument. I guess their intellect is incapable of having a civil discussion. Guess they have something in common with HA after all!!! Feels like talking to childern in the 2nd grade!!!

[Bad Vilbel]

Mace,

You're still not making any sense. You are showing me other FAILURES (Rwanda is a FAILURE. Iraq is a FAILURE). Right?

How do other people's failures exhonerate us from our own? 2 wrongs do not make a right. Just because the US failed in Iraq doesn't mean Suleiman is NOT a failure. The fact is, he still is. You're just trying to make excuses for him by pointing out other failures.

Secondly, EVERYONE IN THE CIVILIZED world agrees that Iraq is a failure. Including the American people which voted the democrats back into congress last year, and are about to do the same this November. Get your facts straight.

You're the one living in a fantasy world apparently.

[Bad Vilbel]

I don't see where anyone used name-calling in their argument with you, Mace. Grow up already.

[Macemuscle]

First of all, I never said or implied that these other failures exhonerate the Lebanese army. Your point was that what is happening is unique to Lebanon and would not happen anywhere else. My point is that it does. I'm not arguing whether it's right or wrong (i.e. not judging it) just stating/correcting the facts. My other point is that we can play the blame game as much as we want, it doesn't change the realities on the ground. What the army did was partly successful (not divide the army, not draw it into a fight it can't win), but if the pro-government politicians want to play hardball they should also point out the need to disarm gunmen on both sides

Also, for your information, the top issues on the U.S. voters mind are the economy, real estate (and subprime woes), oil prices, food prices and possible inflation, unemployment and recession... whether Iraq was a success or failure was not on the list even when pollers asked the question... so yes someone needs to get their facts straight and it ain't me, kiddo

[Ace]

About the whole "Israel" thing.

this is what Hariri said -
"We want to understand how these armed people can move in [Lebanese regions] without the help of Israel. Perhaps this is the beginning of a joint Syrian-Israeli plan to bring unrest back to Lebanon and Beirut."

The first sentence is a poke in the eye for the standard Muslim response to anything "Israel". The important part is the second sentence. It's no secret that Syria & Israel are trying to make a "deal". The "deal" is - Syria wants Lebanon back and they want the Tribunal stopped, this is why Syria insists on the USA being a "negotiator" for this "deal". A "civil war" in Lebanon could possibly have been a way to do that - if M14 had retaliated the way they expected them to. Pressure would have been brought to bear on the UN, USA, AL and Int parties to "stop" the war - and Syria could have done that.

The delegation from the AL will do nothing. M14 will not give in to the ever escalating demands of Hezbollah. About the rescinded orders ? ... so what? All it takes is a Ministerial meeting to re-instate them. They should just quietly sabotage the telecommunications network and put enough of their own people in the airport security to make the Hezbo guy ineffective. These two issues were a "ruse" used by HA to begin with, so giving in to them on this really means little. I think the real "fear" is still the Tribunal and they are running out of time and ideas to stop it.

About Suleiman - he was either following M14's orders to try an control the situation as much as possible ... or he is no longer a "consensus" candidate when push comes to shove because they are now aware for sure he is in HA's pocket.

I'm not Lebanese, but after watching all this closely for a couple of years (on all sides)- I think GeaGea (regardless of his history) has been the most steady and consistent without any interest shown at all in the Presidency. The recent poll/study (about Aoun) on NowLebanon indicates many are also deciding this. In a country where the "leaders" seem to try to outdo themselves with stupidity .. he is looking pretty stable - Lebanon could do a lot worse.

[Yaeli]

"suggesting that Israel might have given the green light for Hizbullah to move troops across Lebanese territory towards Beirut and the mountain, as part of the Syrian-Israeli negotiations."
Do all the leaders in Lebanon have mental disorders?!

[Bad Vilbel]

I didn't say what is happening in Lebanon is unique to Lebanon. I said only in Lebanon do we REWARD the guy who failed at his job by making him president. Go read what i wrote carefully.

Secondly, I live in the US and i know what's on the voters minds. Just because the economy is CURRENTLY the no.1 concern doesn't mean the voters are not holding Bush accountable for the Iraq failures.

What I am talking about, in both cases, the point you seem to be missing is ACCOUNTABILITY.

I am not debating whether this or that thing happened (we all know it happened). I am debating what you do to hold the leaders accountable AFTER it happened.

[Bad Vilbel]

Yaeli,

Yes. They do.

[Bad Vilbel]

And mace,

You ask people not to namecall, then you call me "kiddo".

Please cut/paste where I namecalled you....

I didn't. You're the namecaller here.

PS: This is my last reply to you.

[Bad Vilbel]

Ace,

Your analysis, for someone who isn't Lebanese, is a lot more spot-on than many of the delusions I've read over the past few days.

[Doha]

Yaeli,

Where did you read that quote about Israel giving the green light to Hizbullah? That quote is wrong. Hariri said that perhaps HA attacked Beirut under an Israeli cover (meaning: HA won't be attacked from behind as it moved inwards on the Lebanese). A cover does not translate to green light.

[Solomon2]

GK: Solomon2...seem to argue that "what is" bestows legitimacy and credibility on a phenomenon when it can be clearly illustrated that "what is" is the real problem and therefore we must endeavour to replace it with what "ought".

Ghassan, I am doing my best to describe "what is", especially to Americans like myself who can't easily figure out what Lebanese "democracy" means. "Legitimacy" through custom is what remains when legal structures are heavily damaged through war, regime change, and disuse. For many countries "law" as we know it didn't really exist until early modern times - I think England's laws were finally codified in the late 1500s, France's much later. Lebanon's legal structures are heavily damaged, its courts scarcely seem to be functioning, and electing Suleiman president will chip away at the remnants of Lebanon's Constitution even further.

I am not Lebanese - I am an American, and by some measures a Zionist - so I don't have set ideas what Lebanon "ought" to be. I do have ideas about what Lebanon ought NOT to be: I don't want to see Lebanon and its peoples become deadly tools and thus assured fatalities of the Iranian mullahs' plans to expand their influence throughout the Middle East, nor do I wish to see Lebanon suffer under a suffocating dictatorship.

A sane, functioning democracy would be just fine - but what form that "ought" to take, I don't think it is up to me to have much say. It is my guess that the Bush Administration feels the same way.

[Vox P.]

Aoun living his dream:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1Mqe8GxHKU&feature=related

[Bad Vilbel]

That man is certifiably insane. I still don't understand how some people follow him.

[Ace]

BV ... why do people follow Aoun?
I think it is because he offered something they dream of - a secular Lebanon where all are equal and have equal rights. A different Lebanon than the past.
He was their "Messiah".

The problem is ... they believe that Aoun gave them this "idea" and that this "idea" only exists if he leads it. They don't understand that a free/secular Lebanon has always been part of themselves and it is only Aoun who has "manipulated" their dreams to his advantage. The youth want change, the educated want change, the diaspora want change - and for all of his exile and in the 2005 election -- Aoun used that "call for change" to manipulate the masses. He did it only for his own power and it precious chair. Notice how he quickly switched to terrible sectarianism against the Sunni last year? His perception was that the camp war would turn the Christians against Sunni and gain his supporters after his loss of supporters because of the HA alliance and Jan 23.

by the way .... does this sound familiar to you? Who is the candidate of "change" and "hope" in the USA? Same deal guys - manipulation of the masses.

[Solomon2]

"Do all the leaders in Lebanon have mental disorders?!"

Yes. They all think they collectively own the neighborhood stray named "Israel", and whenever something bad happens to them they write down something nasty about their pet on a newspaper, read it out loud to the world, and proceed to beat Israel with it.

Israel, however, is a very patient pooch who everyone knows never bites anyone for hitting it with a newspaper. For striking with arms, yes, but that's a different story.