Hopes for Lebanon

 

Once again election of president in Lebanon has been delayed because of differences between Lebanese forces and parties. What is the reason of these differences?

The differences are on the election of president and formation of a national unity government. But is that the real reason? Definitely not. What is now conspicuous in Lebanon and the root of all problems in this country, especially after the 33-day war and Israel’s defeat, is the United States’ stance in Lebanon.

True or not it shows a reality anyway. That is, the United States and Israel are not pleased with the developments of recent years in Lebanon. Lebanon was once known as the Bride of Middle East. What Dubai is now known used to be the quality of Lebanon 35 years ago. The country was the center of economy, politics, commerce, espionage, culture; the only Arab country with free newspapers. No other Arab country was in the same position. At that time due to its francophonic nature Lebanon moved in accord with West’s interests and was not a threat to Israel. Things changed after Imam Musa Sadr immigrated to Lebanon. The country turned into the center of resistance, expel of American forces and shatter of Israel’s image.

That’s the root of all crises. A new phenomenon emerged in Lebanon that now challenges Israel’s invincibility and United States’ Great Middle East and stands against all of the United States’ plans for Middle East and Arab countries. The developments that you observe are in fact the surface of what goes around in depth. In fact they want to form a Lebanon with a president, government and parliament belonging to them to attain their goals.

Lebanon must not be the center of resistance against Israel and an inspiration for Palestine. Just like before, it must serve economical, political and strategic objectives of West. That’s why the United States and Israel demand president, prime minister and government that move fulfill this objective.

14^th of March is not a homogeneous group. It consists of different groups, the most honest of which is Saad Hariri’s. Rafiq Hariri had told his son that he didn’t have a partner better that Hasan Nasrullah and Hizbullah if he wanted to construct Lebanon. That’s why in the last two years it was felt that Saad Hariri moved towards solving the problems and breaking this deadlock. Concomitantly Saudi Arabia that was Hariri and Sunni groups’ number one supporter had constructive tendencies but America was the problem. On the one hand America didn’t allow Saudi Arabia to participate actively and on the other hand it had huge influence on Junbalat and Samir Geagea and stirs them to block Hariri’s way in his constructive course.

They [the 14^th of March alliance] are different from each other. Geagea belongs to the radical body of Christians. Junbalat’s problem is Syria. He believes that his father –Kamal Junbalat- has been killed by Syria. He believes that in the past 30 years Syria has held control of all political and economic affairs of Lebanon and now it’s time for the country to leave.

Ultimately the United States and other countries do not leave a chance for the solution of the problem. But everyone knows what will happen if the deadline for election of the president passes and nobody becomes the president. Is a parallel government going to be formed? Will another civil war start? These are terrible prospects that if any of the figures, parties, groups etc. care for Lebanon they must prevent the course events in moving towards it.

Europeans have a special feeling towards Lebanon. They want to show Lebanon belongs to them not the US. Historical records show that after Sykes-Picot agreement Lebanon and Syria fell under France’s mandate. Of course France has always been more influential in Lebanon and now they’re acting according to that tradition.

They think if they solve this superficial problem –election of the president, prime minister and the national unity government- all the problems will be solved. But the truth is that the American ambassador negotiates with Samir Geagea, Saad Hariri and Junbalat.

Up to now the evidence and news indicate that the United States has decided to keep this problem unsolved. If America changes its decision there’s a chance for the three European foreign ministers to solve the problem, otherwise the deadlock will go on.

The Middle East is of high importance for America’s foreign policy. So why shouldn’t they seek for a solution for Lebanon’s crisis?

American wants to solve the problem in the way it desires. It seeks for a president that’s doesn’t have good relationships with Iran, Syria and Hizbullah as Emil Lahud has. They want a president like Fouad Siniora and a government in harmony with him so they start the next stage of their plan.

If these happen, Hizbullah will be disarmed, terrorism will become the focus of attention and Seyyed Hassan Nasrullah and Bashar Asad will be tried. But I have to tell you this is doomed to failure. However the United States, Israel and some other groups and countries follow this end in other ways.

Two groups are showing resistance; Americans that used their power to change the situation in Lebanon and pro-Hizbullah groups that stood against United States’ plans.

From what I know of Lebanese, if they are left alone they’ll solve the problem due to their high political and intellectual understanding. You see that Nabih Berri’s proposal was a perfect one although 14^th of March alliance opposed it. They can’t say why they opposed it. They have nothing to tell Lebanese because the opposition group had withdrew from its demand for formation of a national unity government and had accepted election of president according to the constitution. As far as we know America doesn’t let the crisis to be solved.

Like Egypt, Saudi Arabia made a big mistake in the early days of the 33-days war. The two countries accused Hizbullah of adventurism and indirectly called it the initiator of war. You know why they made this mistake? They thought Israel would crush Hizbullah and put an end to all problems.

The United States and Israel made the same mistake. Of course we can say Israelis made the fewest mistakes because they didn’t want to continue the war. After some days they found out that they couldn’t continue the war but with Rice’s pressure they continued the war up to 33 days. Rice thought that with Hizbullah’s defeat the Great Middle East plan will become operational.

But all had mistaken in their estimation of Hizbullah’s power. On 17^th or 18^th day Egypt and Saudi Arabia took back their initial stance. You can’t be leader of an Arab state and not defend resistance against Israel or at least speak against it. The nation will scold you. Unlike its leaders, the Arab nation is anti-Israel and anti-American. Those stances [of Egypt and Saudi Arabia] were strategic mistakes. But contest between Iran and Saudi Arabia is natural. They are major powers of Persian Gulf and the region and each seeks its own interests.

Junbalat treats Syria and Hizbullah differently. He opposes Hizbullah because of its friendship with Syria. But the reason he didn’t stand against Syria; Syria was the supreme power in Lebanon with a 35000-strong military force and he didn’t dare to talk. After Rafiq Hariri’s assassination UN resolutions forced Syria to get out of Lebanon.

In many case Kouchner has shown that he doesn’t know what to do. Lebanon is one of those cases. You know what that means? Disruption of Lebanon’s tribal structure. That equals a horrible war worse than the last civil war. Sometimes with the development of a country it transcends tribal matters. People reach to a level that being Shiite, Sunni, Druze or Christian is unimportant for them. Individuals become a candidate despite their religion. The one who wins the vote of majority will become president. Such a thing is definitely impossible in Lebanon.

In Iran’s case France unquestioningly follows America but for Lebanon it is different. The two countries are rivals in Lebanon. On Iran’s nuclear issue France follows the United States and has replaced Blaire and Britain but Lebanon is another case.

Look, it’s not about Michel Aoun. A Christian figure that is accepted by all groups will become the president of Lebanon. Everybody knows that the president must be a Christian. They’ve all accepted that. Then they negotiate and agree on a certain person. We can’t guess who will become the president because there’s no unanimity on a certain figure. There must be an agreement.

The deadlock will continue. I wish there will be one. The president becomes chosen and the cabinet forms.