From Beirut to the Beltway

Foreign Policy article misses the mark on Iranian Syrian relations

Interesting article about the rise and fall of Imad Mughniyeh. But I question the sources responsible for the part below.  Mark Perry tried to paint a complex Syrian/Iranian relationship. I get things weren't rosey during Hafez's reign. But after the 2005 Hariri assassination, the Hizbullah war of 2006 and the 2007 Syrian-sponsored Fateh al-Islam war on Lebanon, the following is really hard to swallow:

Relations soured further after the 2006 Lebanon war. Facing domestic economic pressures as a result of U.S.-imposed sanctions, the Syrian president pursued deeper ties with the West -- over Iranian objections. "I want to make this clear: Syria views itself as a Mediterranean country," Imad Moustapha, then Syria's ambassador to the United States, pointedly told me in 2007. "We look west -- not east. We look to America for leadership." The statement, shocking at the time, reflected Syria's desire to normalize relations with Washington -- a fact that discomfited Tehran.

Hezbollah had its own problems with Damascus. Movement leaders were bitter about Syria's February 2007 decision to open a communications channel with Israel through Turkey, and with Assad's decision to send the Sunni Islamist militants of Fatah al-Islam into the Lebanese city of Tripoli, where they sparked a bitter conflict in a Palestinian refugee camp in May 2007 that claimed hundreds of lives. Syria's move in Tripoli roiled Hezbollah leaders, who accused Assad of purposely attempting to destabilize the Lebanese government -- at their expense. "We know who's responsible for Tripoli, even if you and your journalist friends don't," a Hezbollah official told me at the time.

Ties between Damascus and Hezbollah reached a low point that September when Israeli jets bombed Syria's clandestine nuclear reactor under construction in the country's north and Assad's regime refused to respond militarily. In private, a senior Hezbollah leader with whom I spoke accused Syria of "flirting with the Zionists."

Yeah, no.

The Hariri assassination in 2005 ushered in a new era in the region: the complete transformation of the Assad regime into an Iranian satellite. Quoting Imad Mustapha is no evidence to the contrary. 

Hizbullah bitter about Fatah al-Islam because it "destabilized" the Lebanese government "at their expense"? 

In 2007, and the years before and after, Hizbullah wasted no effort to destabilize and undermine the Lebanese government. It culminated in an invasion and occupation of downtown Beirut.  Just hit this blog's archives. 

Hizbullah cared about two things: its weapons, and role as "resistance". Was Nasrallah pissed off Assad did not respond after the Israeli strike?  

He did respond: through Hizbullah. 

March 14: 'revolution' to kick Syrian ambassador out

I am not sure I've ever heard of a "revolution" targeting an ambassador, but sure, why not.

Hariri's al-Mustaqbal paper is headlining, "March 14 youth: Revolution until the Syrian ambassador is expelled".

Again, why not. The "post-Assad period" has begun, the paper announced, with even Aoun "defecting" (according to the paper) by evading a question (from his own TV station) on whether a solution in Syria is tied to Bashar Assad staying in power. The Syrian people will make that call, Aoun said, calling the Syrian revolution an "intifada", and adding that he had always called for change in Syria. All this, of course, is a departure from past speeches in which he fiercely defended the Assad regime and lashed out at the Syrian protestors.

With Michel Samaha, once untouchable, confessing to plotting terrorist attacks on behalf of his Syrian masters, some March 14 leaders must be reveling in the confusion of their foes, especially Hizbullah, which must be in recalculation overdrive these days as they watch their buffer against the rest of the Arab world crumble. The events in Tripoli and the emergence of Sunni fire power there, must also be painting a different picture in the minds of many who once banked on the supremacy of the Iranian-Syrian system. Arab countries and freelance jihadists are coming to the rescue of the Syrian Sunnis against the regime, so let no one in Hizbullah or the pro-Assad camp think they can keep on bullying the Sunnis of Lebanon. 

Much like assassinations, confused regional calculations, and general lack of imagination had rendered March 14 ineffective and unbalanced in the years that followed the Cedar Revolution, the "March 8" camp that rode March 14 weakness to eventually grabbing power in Lebanon is now feeling the heat of a changing power balance in the region.

That's not to say it will soon be over. March 14 is no longer the popular movement it once was, and it's going to take a lot more to shake the state-within-a-state that is Hizbullah.

But I guess you have to start (or restart) somewhere.

Syria back in the spotlight; Hariri soon to regret dumping allies in name of reconciliation

The much-maligned witness Zuheir al-Siddiq called New TV last night to claim possession of evidence incriminating Syrian officials in the 2005 Rafik Hariri assassination. Al-Siddiq's fall from grace and subsequent labeling as "false witness" contributed to even Saad Hariri going back on accusing Assad's regime of killing his father, with the media pointing the finger instead at rogue Hizbullah elements.

With so many "leaks" these days, it is hard to ascertain what's real and what's not. But the timing of al-Siddiq's audio recordings, some of which he played live on TV, is interesting, and coincides with what seems to be a Saudi-Hariri awakening to Syria's destructive role in Lebanon.

Al-Siddiq's tapes reportedly reveal Rustom Ghazaleh's, Syria's former "high commissioner" in Lebanon, role in planning the assassination. Though he did not name him, Al-Siddiq played a conversation between what media reports identified as Ghazaleh and one of his subordinates about their failure to convince Ahmad Abu Adas to carry out a suicide attack against Hariri's convoy.

Abu Adas, for those of you who don't remember him, was the man who appeared in the official video that was sent to Aljazeera claiming responsibility for the Hariri killing.  The UN commission said repeatedly that there was no evidence linking Abu Adas to the attack.

In the recording, a Ghazaleh subordinate complained that Abu Adas refused to carry out the operation because Hariri is "Muslim". Abu Adas wanted instead to attack Americans in Iraq, according to the low ranking officer.  Ghazeleh responded, "Did you tell the animal that Rafik Hariri is an infidel… We have to see about someone from al-Ahbash or Kanso's people. This Abu Adas appears to be a coward".

At this point, Ghazaleh received a phone call, after which he declared, "I am off to see Colonel Maher [Assad]".  Responding to a question from the low ranking officer about what to do with "low life Abu Adas", Ghazaleh said, "take him back to his cell until I return".

Al-Siddiq claimed he has a video showing the torture Abu Adas was subjected to for refusing to carry out the suicide attack.  When he told the Syrian PM about the plot and asked that the responsible be held accountable, the PM dispatched someone to kill him, claimed al-Siddiq.

In total, al-Siddiq said he has 7 recordings that he will hand over to the tribunal.

Interestingly, al-Siddiq accused Saad Hariri of manipulating him to get him to return to Beirut. New TV, some of you might know, had been airing edited segments of taped conversations between al-Siddiq, Hariri and the head of the ISF's information branch Wissam Hassan, in the presence of UN investigators. The channel, owned by a fiercely anti-Hariri millionaire, sought to imply that Hariri manipulated/forged evidence. During the phone call, al-Siddiq acknowledged that he met Hariri and Hassan at the UN's request, but added that they never believed his story.

Despite al-Siddiq's questionable motives and odd behavior over the past few years, the recordings should put the spotlight back on Syria's involvement in the Hariri killing, which for some time was forgotten at the expense of many Lebanese players, including, ironically, Hizbullah.

Al-Siddiq's revelations serve as an important if not painful reminder that two should play the game. One wonders if Hariri regrets tagging along Saudi Arabia's attempt to separate Syria from Iran by exonerating the Assad regime so early in the game.  With Najib Mikati, a man Hariri added to his electoral list in Tripoli by dumping March 14 loyalist Musbah al-Ahdab, is now being positioned by Hizbullah and the Assad regime as an alternative Sunni leader. 

Hariri dumped some of his Sunni and other allies in the 2009 elections in the name of Saudi-Syrian reconciliation, Ahdab being one of them. Now that Mikati, who has just returned from an unannounced visit to Damascus, is paying Hariri back by running against him, Saad and March 14 should learn that repeating the same mistakes over and over again (in the name of compromise) will not bring truth or save Lebanon.

Message to the Druze of Lebanon

There's been an explosion in Lebanon, as you know by now. A mysterious force killed Talal Arslan's right hand man, Saleh Aridi, presumably as punishment for the Druze leader's reconciliation with the other Druze leader, Walid Jumblatt. There were reports that the two had planned a joint electoral ticket next year, which would have finished off Syrian lapdog Wiam Wahab for good.

Wahab never hid his discontent, feeling that the Jumblatt-Arslan rapprochement came at his expense. Earlier this month saw verbal war between Arslan and Wahab, and reports said many of Wahab's followers deserted him to join the Arslan party. Wahab at some point said about Arslan, "If he claims that he's the boy's mother in the Druze sect, then I'm his father".  Wahab accused Arslan of submitting his accreditation to Jumblatt.

The slain Aridi is said to be the architect of the reconciliation between Jumblatt and Arslan.

Justice Minister Ibrahim Najjar told the Voice of Lebanon radio station on Thursday morning that the assassination aimed at “trapping new allies,” a reference to the reconciliation efforts between Jumblatt and Arslan, in which Aridi was a major player, since the May violence in the Chouf. He added that the killing was a blow to the efforts to calm Mount Lebanon.

For his part, Jumblatt told An-Nahar that some were “harmed” by his relation with Arslan, who made his way back to Lebanon after the incident.

As-Safir reported that the assassination came along with an organized campaign of rumors spread in Aley and the Chouf regarding mutual mobilization pitting the opposition, particularly Hezbollah, against the PSP.

Aridi, the paper continued, was Arlsan’s right-hand man and one of the most prominent figures of reconciliation between the latter and Jumblatt. “In so doing, he had benefited from his former position as a PSP member, and he is known for his close relations with several Syrian leaders,” As-Safir read.  (Now Lebanon)

Note that this taking place amid disagreement in the ranks of the opposition, which the Jumblatt-Arslan alliance caused, as did the reaction by some Aounists to Assad's latest speech advising the army to move to the north to combat "extremism".

This "opposition" found itself unable to agree on an agenda for the planned national dialogue next week, let alone form joint lists in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

This latest assassination may be a product of this disagreement, as well as a message to Arslan and other tired Syrian satellites not to stray from the path during the national dialogue, or during the elections.

In the name of the union

According to the French prime minister, Syria has "fulfilled its commitments to Lebanon", so its president deserves to share the podium with the French President to celebrate freedom on July 14th. 

Because nothing inspires freedom and independence like the Assad regime.

And unbeknownst to the stupid Lebanese who mistook Sarkozy for a committed and sane ally, Bashar had "commitments" towards their country that he chose not to temporarily fulfill, allowing death and mayhem to descend on it from the heavens.

French Prime Minister Francios Fillon said Thursday that Damascus had fulfilled its commitments on the issue of the political crisis in Lebanon, and for this reason Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has been invited to attend France's national day military parade on the Champs Elysees after a Paris summit next month.

"Syria has fulfilled its obligations regarding the conflict in Lebanon," Fillon said in response to the criticism launched against the invitation by leftist officials. He was referring to the international community's demand that Syria, which supports Hizbullah's influence in Lebanon, would not thwart the election of Michel Suleiman as the country's president after many months of political turmoil in which Lebanon remained without a leader.

According to Fillon, Syria's presence at the event is important to its theme, which is the promotion of peace in the region. "It is imperative that all of the Middle Eastern countries sit at the table together," he said. Paris has moved to re-launch contacts with Damascus since the election of Suleiman last month. Visiting Beirut last week, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said a "new page may be opening in relations between France and Syria."

Assad is among 50 heads of state and government invited to the July 13 summit on the launch of a new Mediterranean Union, championed by Sarkozy as France takes over the European Union presidency. Experts say Sarkozy is hoping Assad's presence will boost the launch of the Mediterranean Union project, which has received a lukewarm welcome from some European and Arab states. (AFP)

Reporters Without Borders isn't impressed with the invitation.

“Nicolas Sarkozy is breaking one commitment after another,” the press freedom organisation said. “After welcoming Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi with open arms in Paris on 10 December, Human Rights Day, and singing the praises of the Tunisian regime in April, he is now going to celebrate 14 July, which is supposed to be in honour of independence and freedom, next to the president of one of the world’s most repressive regimes.

“How far is Sarkozy ready to go to promote his Mediterranean Union project? What new concessions will he make to the Libyan leader to get him to support this project? When he was running for president, Sarkozy put human rights at the heart of his programme. He said that, with him as president, talks would be much firmer especially, as regards Russia and China. Today we are far, very far, from these commitments. President Sarkozy, like others before him, is pursing a realpolitik at the expense of the values France is supposed to embody.”

Hizbullah's demands and Bashar's comeback

Hizbullah wants March 14 and the government to surrender everything, from executive power to weapons they say Jumblatt has in the Chouf mountain. At the same time, they get to keep their weapons and use heavy artillery against the civilian population.

Parliament speaker and Amal militia leader Nabih Berri wants the government to revoke the two decisions affecting Hizbullah, as a condition to ending the war and starting his proposed dialogue, which he decreed should precede the election of a president. 

Talal Arslan, the pro-Syrian Druze defeated by Jumblatt in the last elections, has been acting as mediator between Hizbullah and Jumblatt, who had agreed to hand over all PSP positions to the Lebanese army. In a press conference today, Arslan implicitly sent Jumblatt's supporters a warning to surrender today or risk Hizbullah fury tomorrow. Arslan warned Jumblatt's supporters that the Lebanese army will not protect them if they decide not to surrender their weapons and alleged weapons cache. He cited a list, which he probably got from his Syrian masters, detailing the whereabouts of Jumblatt's weapons cache.

Although Jumblatt, who is besieged in his Beirut residence, had agreed to these demands, his supporters and other residents of Chouf could not get themselves to accept those terms, which would mean the Jabal falling under Syrian hegemony once again. They put up a good fight against Hizbullah in some villages, and suffered heavy bombardment.

In an interview with al-Hayat published today, Jumblatt said Hizbullah's objective is to prevent March 14 from ruling. Bashar Assad wants to replace him with Arslan, Jumblatt said, adding that the decision to not fight back was hard.

Jumblatt admitted that he and Hariri could have put up a fight, but that they would have eventually suffered a defeat due to the other side's superior capabilities. He said he remembered the threat Bashar Assad made to Rafik Hariri before he killed him. "I will destroy the country over your head", Bashar had said. "I did not want the country to burn, and have people say Jumblatt was the reason, even if I were in a position of self-defence… we evaluated the situation on the ground and saw that we could enter the confrontation but our capabilities are limited compared to Hizbullah's… I didn't want the people of the jabal to commit suicide."

Siniora's cabinet was expected to meet today to revoke the two decisions, after receiving a request from the Lebanese Army command, which has been acting as a messenger for Hizbullah.

March 14's position has been debated at length on this blog. Hariri has not uttered a single word since the first day of the war. His proposal was adopted by the cabinet, but the opposition wanted Siniora to reverse its decisions.

It doesn't look like March 14 will be able to control the masses any longer. The anti-Hizbullah resistance in the Jabal, and the Future movement's action in the north, suggest that Hizbullah will soon have to deal with a rebellious population. Qatar succeeded in buying time for Hizbullah to create more facts on the ground, but the delegation of ministers it will head will find that many Lebanese people do not care about dialogue with the likes of Nasrallah.

Update. It looks like the Syrians will not even allow the the Arab League delegation to land in Lebanon. Bashar's stooge Wiam Wahab today described Amr Moussa, who reportedly is insisting on using the Beirut airport,  as a "small spy who sold himself to Saudi Arabia.. we would prefer to negotiate directly with the Americans".  The pro-Syrian militias have been firing at the Saudi Embassy since the start of Hizbullah's war against the state, forcing the Saudi ambassador to flee the country. One wonders how long the Saudis will wait before they take some form of action against Bashar.

Berri: no president for you

Berri this time didn’t even bother setting a new date for the presidential election after canceling a session he had scheduled for today. In a press conference from the parliament building, he linked scheduling an election session to receiving a response to his “dialogue” proposal.

Berri, who still maintains that parliament is not closed (closed only to the "illegitimate government", he says), also said he prefers to set a date for the election through the ”dialog roundtable”.

The speaker, representing the Assad regime interests in the country, wants an agreement on an electoral law and the shape of the new government before allowing parliamentarians to meet for any purpose, including electing a president.

Constitutional expert and former MP Hassan Rifai weighed in on Berri's tactics.

Constitutional expert and former MP Hassan Rifai said that Speaker Nabih Berri has no right to postpone the presidential-election session.

“He has to be present in the parliament’s chamber of deputies, and if the required quorum is not available, then he can postpone the session,” Rifai told the Saudi daily Okaz.

“The way Berri has been postponing sessions from his office is a crime punishable by the Lebanese penal code. He has no right to close the parliament,” he added.

According to Rifai, the majority could call on Deputy Speaker MP Farid Makari to hold sessions outside the parliament, as long as they are held in Beirut, in order to elect a president and undertake legislative work.

“The parliament is not to be closed, and MPs have the duty to participate in legislative sessions, especially the presidential session,” Rifai said. (Now Lebanon)

Hot summer - updated

David Welch thought it was appropriate for a US official to join the chorus of foreign officials fearing a “hot summer” in Lebanon.

US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Welch said that Lebanon has lost the Arab initiative, which failed to provide for the election of a president.

“I fear that the Lebanese might face a hot summer, similar to the summer of 2006,” which saw the devastating war between Israel and Hezbollah, Welch said at a press conference in Abu Dhabi. (Now Lebanon)

On April Fool's Day, Arab League Secretary-general Amr Moussa reported the same prophecy.

"Many people are telling (us) to expect a hot summer in the region. This scares me a lot because the weakest point…is Lebanon. But when Lebanon gets a president, a unity cabinet and an efficient parliament, (then it) becomes stronger," Moussa said. (Naharnet)

These statements are adding to a Lebanese sense of confusion and resentment towards local and foreign players. We’re not talking civil war here, we’re talking a regional war that, for now, Lebanon is being projected to host, seeing how engaging the principal players directly might be too costly or damaging to the status quo. It would be disgusting if a war similar to the 2006 war spared Syria, Israel and Iran the destruction that was reserved for Lebanon.

As Moussa and Welch said, Lebanon is a strong candidate for hosting such a regional power play because of its inability to have a functioning government and parliament. Instead of sparing Lebanon more destruction, we see Nabih Berri continuing with his efforts to ease pressure on the Assad regime by burying the presidential election underneath a thick layer of illegal conditions, the latest of which is prior agreement on the electoral law.

Update. The US embassy in Beirut has denied that Welch made the above statement. Here is the press release.

U.S. Embassy clarifies Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs C. David Welch’s Statement

April 22, 2008

Several media outlets have incorrectly reported on recent remarks by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs C. David Welch

Answering a question from a reporter in the United Arab Emirates about his trip to Lebanon, Assistant Secretary Welch said Lebanese had expressed to him concern that tourism could suffer again this summer because of the tension in the country. 

The Assistant Secretary said:

"They're worried that they'll have another difficult summer of tourism being low because of the tension in the country, and more broadly, I think they are concerned, ever since Hizballah launched the war in 2006, that maybe Lebanon will miss out from this oil boom, that it will be left behind in the region as there is economic progress elsewhere.  So I found them troubled about the future.

Berri's tricks expire

Now that Assad has come out in support of Berri's dialogue, everyone in Lebanon should fake amnesia, play stupid and let the man who shut down parliament and his butcher-friend tell them that their problems have nothing to do with the Assad regime! Not only is the speaker overstepping his boundaries as legislative authority (which he doesn't even practice) by visiting heads of states, he is acting as an ambassador for the Assad regime, trying to mend that country's relations with other Arab countries at the expense of Lebanon.

Good thing Berri's "tricks" are no longer working. PM Siniora, who is also on an Arab tour, albeit to ratchet up pressure against Syria (as opposed to covering up for its crimes), said the place for dialogue was in parliament, shut down by Berri for over 17 months.  He noted that it was Berri and his friends who shut down the last round of dialogue, which ended, if you recall, when Hizbullah refused to discuss its weapons, and started the July 2006 war.

And while Siniora is gaining support for holding a mini summit to discuss the Lebanese crisis, concluding a visit to Saudi Arabia today, Berri's still waiting for Saudi Arabia to accept his request to visit the Kingdom.  Berri hopes to visit Egypt and Saudi Arabia at least, Assad's main antagonists in his plot to take over Lebanon. One hopes Berri never gets an invitation, and that the Saudis and Egyptians do what the French just did, when they announced that Berri is "not invited to France" over his refusal to open parliament.

Berri in charge

How revolting is it to see the speaker of parliament visiting Bashar Assad to get his blessings for another round of time-buying? Berri has forgotten about the election of a president, scandalously putting it behind him, focusing on pushing forward Assad's agenda, which consists of paralyzing all state institutions until the MPs change, whether through violence or election.

Speaker Nabih Berri said that he will suggest to Lebanese factions that a dialogue be established in parliament on April 18, 19, 20 and 21 during which leaders will discuss the adoption of a new electoral law and the establishment of a national-unity government.

“The candidacy of Army Commander General Michel Sleiman has already been agreed upon,” Berri told the Lebanese daily As-Safir.

“If we reach an agreement, we will hold the presidential elections on April 22. If not, the elections will be postponed,” he added.

He noted that he is waiting for the results of the decisions made at the Arab Summit before establishing the dialogue. “If things are clear, I will undertake two important visits, one to Damascus and another to Riyadh,” Berri said.

“I will decide on my coming moves in light of the results of these two visits and of internal contacts, especially with MP Saad Hariri,” he added.

He also noted that the decisions made during the national dialogue roundtable are final. “It is the implementation procedures that are being debated.”

Berri said that if the situation remains as it is until the summer, “we must seriously consider an interim government that will prepare for the legislative elections in 2009.” He also stressed on the importance of agreeing on an electoral law, whether the 1960 or the 2000 models, the law suggested by the national committee under the presidency of Fouad Boutros, “or any other formula for a fair and just law.”

Berri said he fears that Lebanon will reach the 2009 legislative elections without an electoral law in place and with the legislative and presidential vacuum continuing. “This is why my priority is the electoral law,” he said.

So Berri wants to resume setting the agenda, after a brief interruption during which Michel Aoun was given the reign. If indeed the electoral law is a priority, then Berri should convene parliament right away to discuss it. But no, he couldn't do that. What if the deputies actually got together in one room and dared to "implement" their right to, say, elect a president?

It is sad, and depressing, that these simple truths evade so many. Berri should not be allowed to keep hijacking the process, and blaming lack of progress on "implementation procedures being debated". He should not get away with warning that if things don't go his way, " we will lose Lebanon". If you ask me, the priority right now should be losing Berri and his illegal "dialogue". The man has clearly sold his conscience to his Damascus master. He also clearly does not speak for parliament, so why continue to pretend that he does?

ANB is reporting that Berri is currently meeting with Assad in Damascus. This comes as Siniora, the prime minister Berri does not even recognize, is being reported as saying that Syria is holding Lebanon hostage.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora accused Syria of holding Lebanon hostage by blocking the election of a new president following talks with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.  Siniora told reporters he saw the Lebanese-Syrian relationship as one of siblings and “one sibling cannot kidnap his brother and keep him hostage in the hope of getting a ransom,” he said.

He urged Arab foreign ministers to hold an extraordinary meeting to discuss the political deadlock in Lebanon and the country's strained relations with Syria. Siniora also called for the implementation of the Arab initiative, which calls for the election of Army Commander General Michel Sleiman as president, the formation of a national-unity government and the adoption of a new electoral law.

Siniora's retarded analogy apart, it pains me to see that Berri's latest call for dialogue is not being met with across the board rejection from March 14. We have heard a few voices, but it looks like at least Jumblatt and Gemayel are willing to humor Berri, for reasons only known to them. That's despite their acknowledgment that the war against Lebanon is taking the form of "deactivation" of its institutions.

President of the Kataeb party Amin Gemayel said he believed the difficulty of the Lebanese situation today had led some Lebanese to despair. “It is their right to be afraid, particularly when they see institutions under attack, the presidency in total vacuum, the parliament closed, and the Lebanese army subject to attempts at its destruction,” he added.

Gemayel said the war on Lebanon had taken a new form. “The war on Lebanon is not by guns or arms, but through the deactivation of institutions and political, social and economic life.”

“We resist this war, and we will win. We will not despair or fear,” he said.

How the hell are you going to "win this war" while keeping Berri in charge of you?