STL vs Hizbullah update

I have been too busy settling in Brussels and working to blog a lot lately, but things seem to be coming to a head in Beirut. A gynaecologist’s office seems to have been the symbolic battleground for the prevailing forces to finally meet out in the open. There is more and more talk of the ‘opposition’ M8 preparing to topple the government and perhaps repeat the May 2008 scenario – with results nobody could possibly predict. Rami Khoury wrote a lucid analysis of the situation in yesterday’s Daily Star, cutting straight to the essence of the problem: ‘Stripped to its core, this tension between Hizbullah and the STL is a microcosm of the overarching fact of the modern era in which Western-manufactured Arab statehood has generally failed to gain either real traction or sustained credibility; thus it has fallen on groups like Hizbullah to play a leading role in confronting Israeli and Western power in a manner that most Arab governments have been unable or unwilling to do. Therefore we live through this historic but frightening moment when a century of confrontation reaches a pivotal juncture: the collective will of the Western-dominated world (the Security Council-created STL) confronts the strong rejection and public resistance of the only Arab group (Hizbullah) that has forced an Israeli military withdrawal and confounded the Israeli armed forces, while transcending Arabism and Islamism, religiosity and secularism, Arabs and Iranians, Shiites and Sunnis, and assorted Lebanese Christians and Muslims.’

Angry Arab just returned from a visit to Lebanon and Syria and has this to report (in his usual off-hand stream-of-consciousness ranting style but also with his rare inside knowledge and understanding): ‘There is much nervousness about what is happening and what will happen.  It is all about the Hariri tribunal and its much anticipated–not by me–decision.  The US Middle East Zionist policy making apparatus is up in arms: because the March 14 movement is in such disarray.  Jeffrey Feltman foolishly assumed that his visit to Lebanon (in the wake of his visit to Saudi Arabia) will be sufficient to revive a corpse.  Feltman even thought he was being witty when he called on the Iranian president to learn from Lebanon’s “pluralism”.  I wonder if he dared to ask the Saudi Wahhabi king to learn from the pluralism of Lebanon too.  Feltman is furious at the transformation of Walid Jumblat: one of the most skillful–and most unprincipled–politicians in Lebanon.  His value is not so much in the size of his constituency which is very small, but in his abilities in political rhetoric and sloganeering.  The best gift that Hizbullah has ever attained–outside of Iranian support–is the stupidity of Sa`d Hariri.  This is the talk of the town.  You hear Sunnis and Shi`ites, pro-March 8 and pro-March 14 all talk about the stupidity of this lucky or unlucky man–depending on the outcome.  It is not that he has not shown any signs of progress or learning or even accumulated experience but he has squandered one political opportunity after another.  He is mocked widely for spending so much time outside of Lebanon.  He leaves for Al-Riyadh to receive orders form the Saudi King or his lieutenants at the drop of a hat.  He has even squandered his fortune in stupid business moves: he bought the share of his brother Baha’ only to lose much of it later.  But make no mistake about it: I learned that much of the Hariri expenditure in Lebanon is in fact Saudi money–and mostly from the budget of Prince Muqrin who may be replaced soon, probably by a son of Prince Salman.  There is so much going on in Lebanon: just like Lebanon in the 1950s, so many foreign and domestic intelligence services are in conflict in Lebanon.  This is a place infested with spies–not only Israelis.  I am told one of the spies for Israel (who has not been arrested for lack of evidence) is a high ranking Lebanese Army officers who was slated to succeed Jean Qahwaji as commander-in-chief (Qahwaji is bitterly anti-Israel and fiercely anti-Lebanese Forces.  He has sent a private message to Lebanese Forces that any attempt to “descend on the ground” will be met by force by the Army).’

Ahmadinejad and Murdoch

So he didn’t go to the Park of Iran and didn’t throw a stone over the border after all: ‘Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ended a two-day visit to Lebanon by meeting with Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. The overnight meeting took place at the Iranian embassy in Beirut’s Bir Hasan neighborhood. Nasrallah proudly presented to Ahmadinejad an Israeli rifle seized during the 2006 Israel-Hizbullah war.(…) Before the late Thursday meeting with Nasrallah, Ahmadinejad predicted the demise of arch-foe Israel from Bint Jbeil, Hizbullah’s bastion in south Lebanon, only four kilometers (2 miles) from the Jewish state. “The whole world knows that the Zionists are going to disappear,” he said to thunderous applause before a frenzied crowd in Bint Jbeil. “The occupying Zionists today have no choice but to accept reality and return to their countries of origin,” he added.’

In another interesting development, a Lebanese court has just issued an indictment in the long running case over the ownership of the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation (LBC), originally the mouthpiece TV station of the Lebanese Forces. The judge indicted ‘[LBC's] chairman Pierre Daher, members of the board and the affiliated companies on charges of embezzlement and fraud. The indictment noted that Daher as LBC’s chairman was entrusted with shares that are actually owned by the LF. Daher moved the assets and shares of the television, sold its films archive and increased the capital without his personal financial contribution, in addition to bringing new shareholders and establishing affiliated companies, said the indictment, adding that Daher has procrastinated in returning the assets to the owners despite the legal warnings, which is considered a crime of embezzlement. The judge sought three years in prison for Daher on the aforementioned charges.’ Board member Raif al-Bustani and several LBC-affiliated companies were also indicted. Judge Aneisi referred the indicted individuals to Beirut’s criminal judge who is supposed to set a date for trial.’ It is useful to remember that the ‘new shareholders’  include Saudi prince Walid bin Talal and Rupert Murdoch and that the ‘affiliated companies’ mentioned are Kingdom Holdings and Newscorp. To be continued…

On a side note, the International Crisis Group has released a new report on Lebanon called: ‘New crisis, old demons: the forgotten lessons of Bab-Tebbaneh/Jabal Mohsen’, in which it is argued that the state of tensions between these two dirt-poor neighbourhoods of Tripoli (one sunni, one alawi) serves as a barometre for Lebanon’s general state of affairs. A rather academic-analytic argument, but not without its merits. Incidentally, for some strange reason, my own posts on the matter (here and here, written when there was an actual low-grade urban war going on between the factions back in June 2008, and the related ‘Halba in Akkar’ here) are perennial favourites which keep gathering hits for the blog. So maybe other people have drawn the same conclusion too. At some point, I plan to write a post on the ‘greatest hits’ on this blog and the most common search terms used to find it. I can already reveal that ‘Hassan Nasrallah and Haifa Wehbe’ and ‘King Abdullah and Hind Hariri’ are among the high scores…

Nejad in Beirut

You wouldn’t know it from reading the international media – definitely not the Belgian ones, whose entire foreign news section today and yesterday is dedicated to the good news story of the Chilean miners – but the president of Iran has just crossed through Beirut in an open motorcade and refused to stand behind the bulletproof glass cases provided while he gave his speeches. I would like to see a US or Saudi leader do that in Lebanon… It is hardly surprising that crowds lined up in Dahiyyeh to give him a hero’s welcome, of course. What is surprising though are statements by the likes of Samir Geagea and Antoine Zahra congratulating him on his ‘moderate’ statements and even sunni arch enemies Jamaa al Islamiya claiming that ‘Ahmadinejad’s calm speech in Lebanon will positively reflect on the domestic situation after his visit ends.’ Sounds like either some bags of dollars have been changing hands or the Lebanese Forces have – for the first time in their history – made a political choice that actually makes sense and could be to the advantage of the people they claim to represent. Those international media that do mention the visit predictably concentrate on Ahmadi Nejad’s announced tour of the southern border and Israel’s equally predictable reaction to this ‘provocation’. For some more considered thoughts and reporting, read Qifa Nabki: ‘This is a very circuitous way of saying that I found myself wondering today, as I listened to Nasrallah’s speech welcoming Ahmadinejad to Beirut, whether Iran is trying to step out of Hizbullah’s shadow in Lebanon. That sounds odd to hear, given the nature of their relationship. But I think that it’s not that far-fetched to imagine that Iran’s ambitions include winning over non-Shi’a Lebanese through a mixture of investment projects, military aid, assistance in energy exploration and infrastructure development.’

Or read the Leveretts: ‘If Iran today has substantial soft power in the Middle East—as we believe it does—it has that power in no small part because it has picked winners rather than losers as its allies in key regional theaters.  Whether we speak of Hizballah in Lebanon, HAMAS in Palestine, or Shi’a Islamist parties in Iraq, Iran’s regional allies are genuine political forces—that is, forces that win elections because they represent important and unavoidable constituencies with legitimate grievances.  And, in many cases, those allies engage in what their constituents believe is thoroughly laudable resistance against what those constituents see as America’s (and Israel’s) hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East.’

Juan Cole is spot-on too: ‘On Wednesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed large and adoring crowds in the southern Shiite suburbs of Beirut, which had been intensively bombed by Israeli fighter jets in summer 2006, and then subsequently rebuilt, in part with Iranian aid. Ahmadinejad pledged that Iran will support Lebanon in any future case of aggression against the small Levantine state of 4 million persons. Americans who are surprised at Lebanese appreciation of Iran should remember that when the Israel-Hizbullah war broke out in summer 2006, the Bush administration initially actively opposed a ceasefire that could have saved hundreds of Lebanese civilian lives and could have spared billions of dollars in infrastructure. When someone is being intensively bombarded from the air and you attempt to put off a ceasefire, you are not a friend of the country being bombed.’ Cole also wrote this op-ed at Truthdig: ‘Ahmadinejad has just pledged to invest nearly half a billion dollars in Lebanon’s electricity and water systems to aid the economy, which has grown 8 percent this year and has made impressive strides in rebounding from the disastrous effects of the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War. Iran is a major backer of the Hezbollah Party, though it does not need Tehran to function. Hezbollah is a bona fide Lebanese political party and is part of the current national unity government, with two Cabinet seats and influence over policy. Its small paramilitary of a few thousand fighters, backed by an arsenal of small rockets, has been recognized by the Lebanese government as a sort of national guard for the south of the country. A crisis between Hezbollah and the government of the Sunni Muslim prime minister, Saad Hariri, looms, since a tribunal may blame Hezbollah operatives for the 2005 assassination of the prime minister’s father, Rafiq Hariri. Ahmadinejad may hope to broker an agreement that would forestall civil conflict between Shiites and Sunnis.’

And now go back to the rescued Chilean miners.