Nasrallah is cornered, boys there will be no compromise. By resorting to let the people decide who they want “one man one vote” (which i like ) and he knows that it will not happen. If I were M14 i would call his bluff and accept this amendment but make the vote permanent.Although this would set a dangerous precedent for democracy in the ME, I cannot see the Zaims having the confidence or the courage to accept this, as this is a sure step to sideline the confessional system. Nasrallah must be confident with his numbers, otherwise he would not have suggested this. Meanwhile he and his allies and the opposition will continue to arm. And brace yourselves, it can mean only one thing, there will be no understanding, the mentality is its us versus them, Jumblatt is due in the states in the next week, hence M14 will wait for the outcome of this visit to see what support the Americans offer before confrontation is inevitable.

I have not seen the speech live, im leaving work in the next half hour and will catch the Five o clock news, so will see what he had to say.

I am surprised about one matter, that it has taken him so long to come out and say that the Syrian Regime is innocent. By doing so at this critical junction in time, he is letting his supporters know that he is firmly in Syria’s orbit of influence and this must sure be re assuring for the Syrian regime, as it tries to sidestep the tribunal.

On the potential peace conference, I think he has over stepped the mark here, he should have said either we all go or none of us, nothing more nothing less. Either full peace or the staus quo.

Quoting Enlightened :

‘By doing so at this critical junction in time, he is letting his supporters know that “he is firmly in Syria’s orbit of influence” and this must sure be re assuring for the Syrian regime, as it tries to sidestep the tribunal.’

What do you mean by being in Syria’s orbit of influence ?
He believes, and he is not the only one, that Syria is not the culprit in these assassinations. That the culprit is Israel. And that is what most people believe.

Interesting post, thank you Alex and Idaf for the analysis and for the commentary….
Nassrullah is also concerned about the Shite-Sunni sectarian strife, hence he asserts:
1- His staunch support for improving the situation of the Palestinian camps inside Lebanon.
2- His calling on the Arabs not to let down the Palestinians of the occupied territories…
3- His vehement rejection of partitioning Iraq…

This guy has a regional vision, he knows how to strum the emotional cords of the ordinary Arabs, yours truly included….

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=3695754&page=1

Offended,

That was a good point.

This was an announcement to his fellow Lebanese in which he basically said:

I will propose another reasonable way out of out problem (selecting a president through democratic elections) … M14 will turn it down. Now we need to be honest about what is going on … this is about regional politics, not about what is good for Lebanon. Saad and Walid are going to Washington to ask for help, they are getting Saudi help … I am telling you that I will not shy away from siding with Syria on this one, because the only reason siding with Syria is not kosher in Lebanon was that Syria is killing out political leaders in order to control us … and I don’t buy it anymore.

You will start hearing the Lebanese admitting more and more that their selection of a president will have to depend on an agreement between Syria and Saudi Arabia and the United states … just like the old days.

Annie said

“What do you mean by being in Syria’s orbit of influence ?
He believes, and he is not the only one, that Syria is not the culprit in these assassinations. That the culprit is Israel. And that is what most people believe.”

Annie, I agree … but that is what most people in Syria think, not in Lebanon. Nasrallah is a Lebanese leader, and in the past he was always careful not to offend the other Lebanese who hate Syria for killing Hariri. I would assume that 30% of the Lebanese strongly believe Syria killed Hariri and the other politicians and journalists.

Ehsani,

That new story proves that a large part, if not all, of the stories still circulating until today are fabricated.

This story says that the targets picked for the attack were decided few months ago. Yesterday’s story was that Israel targeted six trucks that were loaded on Sep 6th in Tartus …

Whatever.

Brilliant and bold speech! This US administration is in dissaray, nothing is working for them in the area:
-the “conference on Palestinians” is seriously compromise and it si been scaled down to an informative meeting…
-Iraq governement gave a blunt NO WAY to an attack on Iran –
-Dubai is calling for closer ties to Iran and warned the West about the impact on the relation if Iran is attacked.
Read this
-the sanctions on Iran fell apart and the great powers took great satisfaction in agreeing to postpone them!
-Blackwater scandal is making the Iraqis bolder about their caretakers, knowing that the latter are trapped in an endless role of security guards.
listen to this

What is left is just verbal threats that no one believe in anymore! Unless the Bush administration and Israeel, feeling weak an humiliated by all these failures make an irresponsible move.
Nasrallah did very well to take a position of strenght as this is the only language the US and Israel understand.

Today the NYT has a fascinating article about the preparation for a civil war in Lebanon with various Christian factions arming and training for an upcoming fight. The Christian community is split with one faction still clinging to the hope that they will remain in full power as if their minority status is non existent; and this the position of the Phalange party and the Lebanese Forces and the other faction saying we have to accomodate to the new reality and work with our friends and neighbors in Lebanon and these are all the other with Aoun and Franjieh as main players. Why-Discuss above may be correct in shwoing the disarray of the current policies in the US. However, count on all the dum and dumber and the vain and megalomaniacs in the Arab world to make sure that the Israeli US strategy gets to pass. Arabs are known to cut off their nose despite their face.

This is the article

Christian Split in Lebanon Raises Specter of War”

I doubt that a sectarian war in Lebanon is possible or fesible. The Lebanese (with the exception of few misfits) must have learned few lessons from what is on going around them. Besides, Militarily, Hizbullah+Amal+Aoun+al Marada+ SSNP+ other Sunnies control more ground fire power (if needed) that is sufficient to deter any other Lebanese faction from really tampering with them. Through in the Army, which most surly will side with them, then who can stand up to such an alliance.

More chaos, maybe, more assasinations to show that the Opposition and Syria are “bad for stability” yes, but not much more than that.

AS to Nassrallah’s reference clear reference to Israel’s responsibility (under US cover which he mentioned only once), the intention was I believe Not to defend Syria, but to FORCE the Lebanese to think in logical terms, hence resulting in them distancing themselves away from the FEb 14 Crowd (and the US line). Especially as the Feb 14 Crowd is now showing signs of disillusiment, inter-coaltion rivlary and disintegration.

His note to Saudi Arabia ( and other Moderate Arabs whom he portarayed as irrelevant by not even naming them) was intended 1) for the Arab and Palestinian Street, and 2) here I think he said what he believed in and what he said and had said he knew that “official” Syria would not say publically with Syrian Saudi relations being as tense as they are.

I loved the way in which he supported Aoun (and maybe Michele Suliman in a way) without naming a name by clearly painting him as The uncontested Person Lebanon needs right now.

Let Bush and the Feb 14 and the Saudies deciepher the speach and plot their next miss-step.

But in general, as Alex said, he is preparing the street for the heat wave which will follow in a way of: “We did all we could”, and “I told you so, so do not blame us in the future”.

Brilliant I think,sincere, convincing, full of confidence, and as defiant as is needed at this moment.

Does anyone know what is happening to the international tribunal, it seems bogged down and even Bush questionned it delay after he met with Hariri jr? What about Hercule Brammertz’s report?

Dear All,

Sayyed Hassan used to face the accusation of the Syrian regime with asserting there shd be no accusation before the end of the trial; since he was always (rightfully) prompt to the contrary in accusing Israel of car bombs in Dahié before any judiciary investigation, his suddenly legalistic position appeared to reflect his intimate conviction that the Syrian regime he is allied to is the culprit; it looked like an attempt at delaying the political consequences of the guilt until after the trial starts if ever then comes to an end some years later. However his prudent position saved his rightfully vaunted credibility, and reflected his respectable genuineness (a rarity in the arab world, as he said yesterday).

The fllwg excerpt from his speech now expresses a change: “Since it is a matter of mere political reading, a matter of political data and of political analysis, I tonight do not want to talk of a hypothesis but of an intimate conviction and of a vision, not only a hypothesis but more than a hypothesis, as this is my intimate conviction and my vision of the security matter, and I expose it to Lebanese and to the leaders of 14 March and to their audience too and to the families of the martyrs so that they think and consider and study, as long as the matter is a matter of political data and political reading”. He thus openly moved, if a culprit must be fingered before any trial, to “political reading”, to “vision”, and “intimate conviction”.

He then expresses what he announced as his vision/intimate conviction: “MP Jubran Tuéni was assassinated one day prior to the Council of Security meeting held to approve the principle of the international tribunal, or maybe the very day; MP Pierre Gemayel was killed on the day of a meeting of the S.C held for the approval of the Statute of the International Tribunal; the third was the assassination of MP Antoine Ghanem on the day when the S.C was meeting to hear the Executive Report for the creation of the International Tribunal, the delay in the creation of which the Americans are complaining about. What a coincidence!”

If his vision/intimate conviction is that the killers timed the murders so that they coincide with relevant meetings of the Security Council and disarm the reluctance of Russia & China, the fllwg need be clarified:

1. The killing of Jibran Tueni was not timed to occur concomitantly with a meeting scheduled for that day (or for the fllwg day): no meeting was originally scheduled. It is the killing of 12/12/2005 that triggered the 5329th meeting of the Security Council, of 15/12/2005, during which the Security Council “Acknowledges the Lebanese Government’s request that those eventually charged with involvement in this terrorist attack be tried by a tribunal of an international character » (Resolution 1644). The referred to Lebanese request was made by “the letter of the Prime Minister of Lebanon to the Secretary-General of 13 December 2005 (S/2005/783) requesting the establishment of a tribunal of an international character”, further to the killing.

Thus, Sayyed Nasrallah is only left instead, regarding this 1st point, with alleging that the murderers wilfully aimed at provoking the Lebanese Government into setting the stage for the ministerial crisis that ensued from its requesting from the S.C the creation of the tribunal. An opposite speculator is allowed to claim with some reason that Jubran Tueni’s killers bet to the contrary that Siniora wd not dare setting the stage for a ministerial crisis and requesting from the S.C the creation of an international tribunal. With all due respect to Sayyed Hassan, the allegation he wd be left with wd not be a substantiated “vision”, or a corroborated “intimate conviction”. It wd be a speculation of a lightness he did not acquaint us to.

2. To be honest, no meeting of the S.C was scheduled to approve the Statute of the international Tribunal on the day when Pierre Gemayel was murdered (21 nov.2006) (pls check on http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/). No meeting at all was held by the S.C on that day. Pls also note the Statute was only approved during the meeting of the S.C held on 30 May 2007 (six months later).

On 21 november 2006, the President of the S.C merely wrote to the Secretary-General to advise him that further to consultations undertaken with each of the members of the S.C he authorizes the Secretary General to proceed with signing with the Lebanese Government the draft agreement for the creation of the international tribunal distributed to the members as of 15 november.

Did Pierre Gemayel’s killers time their murder on 21 november in order to disarm the opposition of some members of the Security Council? Why not. Maybe Sayyed Hassan has a piece of evidence to support his vision. One may hold the opposite view as well, more rational i must say, that from the moment when the S.C took its resolution 1664 of 29 march 2006 (i.e seven months earlier) asking the Secretary General to negotiate with Mr. Siniora’s government the agreement aiming at the creation of the international tribunal, the problem for the international tribunal laid only in Imad Lahoud’s and President Berri’s ability to block the constitutional process of ratification, while the S.C members from their end had done their internal bargains and agreed on the international tribunal. Pls notice in this respect that when the parliamentarian majority requested the S.C to overcome the constitutional deadlock and vote the international tribunal as a mere Chapter VII decision, Resolution 1757 was voted as a mere formality.

3. Sayyed Nasrallah’s assertion that the killers of Antoine Ghanem timed the murder (19 september 2007) with the meeting scheduled for approving the report of the Secretary General for the creation of the International Tribunal, at the time when President Bush was complaining of delays in the creation, must deal with the precision that the report, which dates of 4 september, required no approval from the S.C members, and consequently received no such approval.

With all due respect to Sayyed Nasrallah, i continue to think that (i) judges in Beirut would stand a high risk of being impeded from investigating/judging, or even assassinated (ii) judges commissioned in Damascus to instruct and judge the Hariri case made no more progress than any judge during the Syrian regime rule in Lebanon for the murders of Salim Laouzi, Moufti Khaled, Soubhi Saleh, Nazem Kadri, Kamal Joumblatt, President Bachir Gemayel, President René Moawad, Elie Hobeika, Ramzi Irani (only murders perpetrated by an enemy of the Syrian regime were investigated and judged, i.e the murders perpetrated by Samir Jaja) (iii) judges in the Hague stand better chances of identifying the murderer state.

Sayyed Nasrallah should not capitalize on his credibility to obstruct justice.

Best regards

Nasrallah has steadily squandered his credibility since the day the Israelis withdrew from Lebanon. Until then I was able to set aside his character as a Shi’ite jihadi and view him as a National Resistance leader. Since then he has revealed himself to be a petty sectarian za’im like the rest, and a willing tool of the Iranian-Syrian regional project, as well.

I grew up romanticizing Hizballa as freedom fighers resisting the Israeli enemy. I have not yet lost my admiration for Hizballa during that era. But the turning point, for me, was the March 8 rally: Hizballa’s first public reaction to the Hariri killing and the spontaneous movement for Lebanese liberation from Syrian tyranny and and the return of international support for Lebanon. So Nasralla came out and bellowed: “Shukran li Souriya al-Asad”. Not “thank you Syria”. Not “thanks to the Syrian people”. He said thanks to “Asad’s Syria”. Thanks to the murderous regime, at a time of when the Lebanese people were reeling from Syria’s bloody interference in Lebanon and celebrating our liberation.

Internally, this latest renewed message of solidarity with Syria will be understood as a big “F you” to at least 50% of Lebanon. It will be much easier now to drop the reverence attached to Hizballa and to openly accuse them of being treacherous tools of foreign interests.

Annie, I don’t know what planet you’re on, but to think “most people believe Israel is behind the killings” is ludicrous. Everyone knows it’s Syria aside from a handful of delusional Arab Nationalists, and a separate bunch of cynical propagandists.

The tragedy is that, regardless of the truth, regardless of justice, we are destined to lose our liberal Lebanon. The only “teeth” of our Independence Movement are gifts from the international community. They are sorely limited; they have not always been made available to us; they can be rescinded at any moment.

Unlike our internal opponents, we are simply not ready to kill and die for our cause. We tried before and lost, and we are much weaker now than then. If war broke out we would certainly lose, and aside from a tiny fringe, we do not have the stomach to even contemplate such an option. After all, we are not brainwashed jihadis who “love death and martyrdom”. We would rather emigrate to Canada, Australia and France to live middle class lives in peace and freedom.

As Lebanon becomes more like Syria or Iran, God forbid, I will watch sadly from afar, thankful that I escaped with my life, my family and my values intact. And I will keep some memories of Free Lebanon to reminisce from time to time.

Annie Said

Quoting Enlightened :

‘By doing so at this critical junction in time, he is letting his supporters know that “he is firmly in Syria’s orbit of influence” and this must sure be re assuring for the Syrian regime, as it tries to sidestep the tribunal.’

What do you mean by being in Syria’s orbit of influence ?
He believes, and he is not the only one, that Syria is not the culprit in these assassinations. That the culprit is Israel. And that is what most people believe.

Annie I do not profess to know who killed Harriri, I have never said on this site that i believe Syria or Syria’s Regime is to blame, likewise I have never said Israel is to blame, like wise I have never pointed the finger at anyone, if we logically look at the players in the arena, anyone could be responsible, even the within the Lebanese arena any of the Zaims or political leaders have a pretty decent record of murder and assasination from Gemyel to Jumblatt to Geagea ! Until we have a court case and see the evidence and see who actually did it will we really know.

The point is this Annie, Political murder and assasination should not be allowed to be perpetrated by anyone, even Bashar Assad in one of his interviews has said if anyone within Syria is found to be the perpetrator he will be considered a traitor!

So the sooner we see the evidence, and the trial (and as long as it is fair and not politically motivated) the better things will be.

KAMAL said:

“Everyone knows it’s Syria aside from a handful of delusional Arab Nationalists, and a separate bunch of cynical propagandists.”

….and Serge Brammertz too, I would add….

Ausamaa,

It may be Judge Brammertz is exhibiting no findings because the murderer left no clue whatsoever for any of the numerous killings.

It may be even the voluminous investigation file of 120,000 pages confirms Sayyed Hassan’s (late) “vision”, “intimate conviction”, and “political reading”.

We will soon know, provided that nobody in or out of Lebanon is allowed to block the effective functioning of the International Tribunal, which Sayyed Nasrallah again characterized as a U.S instrument aimed at breaking Syria’s resistance to a U.S engineered peaceful settlement.

[…] Nasrallah calls on Saudi Arabia to boycott the upcoming Middle East conference Syria Comment, October 6, 2007 […]