![\"\"](\"http:\/\/graphics8.nytimes.com\/images\/2009\/04\/29\/world\/29lebanon-600.jpg\")
<\/a>Men carried former domestic security chief Ali Hajj after his arrival home from prison in Beirut on Wednesday.By <\/p><\/div>\n
UN Court Releases Lebanese Generals in Hariri Case<\/a> April 29 (Bloomberg) — A United Nations tribunal investigating the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri ordered the release of four Lebanese generals held in connection with the killing.<\/p>\n Judge Daniel Fransen of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon said the four generals held in Lebanon since 2005 are to be freed because there isn\u2019t sufficient evidence to continue their detention, given that some witnesses have modified or retracted their statements. Proceedings were aired live from The Hague by Arab and Lebanese broadcasters and on the Internet.<\/p>\n There were \u201cinconsistencies in the statements of key witnesses\u201d and a \u201clack of corroborative evidence to support these statements,\u201d Fransen said.<\/p>\n Former Canadian Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bellemare, who took over the investigation last year and became the court\u2019s chief prosecutor on March 1, said he wouldn\u2019t appeal the ruling.<\/p>\n The judge ordered the immediate release of Mustafa Hamdan, former head of the Presidential Guard; Jameel al-Sayyed, the former general security chief; Ali al-Hajj, the former internal security head; and Raymond Azar, the former army intelligence director. All four were arrested in 2005….<\/p>\n Saad Hariri, the second-eldest son of Rafiq Hariri and the leader of the ruling March 14 coalition, said \u201cwe accept and respect\u201d the decision. Hariri said in a televised news conference from Beirut that he expects the tribunal to uncover the person or group responsible for the assassination.<\/p>\n \u201cWe do not want revenge,\u201d he said. \u201cAll we want is justice.\u201d He urged his supporters to accept the ruling and said today\u2019s decision affirms the court\u2019s credibility.<\/p>\n In December 2005, Lebanon\u2019s government asked the UN to set up a tribunal to try those responsible for the Feb. 14, 2005, killing of Hariri and 22 others by a roadside bomb.<\/p>\n Al-Sayyed arrived at his home in the Lebanese capital today, and was greeted by Hezbollah lawmakers and dozens of supporters who threw rose petals in the air and cheered as he walked by, live video footage aired by al-Jazeera showed….<\/p>\n \u201cThis verdict underlines how politicized the investigation was,\u201d Lebanese American University Professor Amal Saad-Ghorayeb said in a telephone interview from Beirut. \u201cIt also discredits the Lebanese judiciary and the politicians who accused these generals.\u201d The ruling has \u201cfar-reaching political implications,\u201d she said. \u201cIt may weaken the pro-Western coalition in the upcoming elections and strengthen Hezbollah and its allies.\u201d Lebanon holds parliamentary elections on June 7.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Robert Worth of the NYTimes add<\/a>s:<\/p>\n The first prosecutor in the case, Detlev Mehlis, released a report<\/a> in 2005 that said that the assassination had been planned by high-level Syrian and Lebanese officials, including some in the inner circle of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n [Landis Comment<\/strong>] Technically, it is not correct to write that the UN released a report that sadi that the assassination had been planned by high-level Syrian and Lebanese Officials.” Mehlis sent his report to the UN headquarters where it was released after redaction. The released copy did not name any Syrians, although the report argued that Syria had the means and motive. Journalists discovered that if they clicked on the “uncorrect” button on Microsoft Word, the eliminated names of Syrians appeared in an earlier unredacted version. I remember this because in 2005 Nick Blanford, the Christian Science Monitor reporter in Beirut, called me in Damascus in excitement to explain to me how to get the Syrian names. The UN mistake caused major excitement among reporters who could claim to be true investigative sleuths by doing little more than pressing a key on their computers. It was sensational and seemed to nail Syria – something the Bush-Cheney team in the White House was eager to do.<\/p>\n The UN did not meant to “release a report in 2005 that said that the assassination had been planned by high-level Syrian and Lebanese officials.” Instead cautious leaders took out the names, presumably because they did not believe the evidence was strong enough or because they did believed it unwise to release names. As it turned out the UN leaders that redacted the report were correct in their caution. The evidence implicating Syria gathered by Mehlis was based on the testimony of witnesses that later recanted and\u00a0 explained that they were paid by Hariri operatives to give false testimony. One was Husam Husam [see this article about how he recanted<\/a>] and another was Sadiq [see this article on his recant by Alex<\/a>] claimed to have been pressured to testify or offered money give false testimony. Nevertheless, reporters have continued to write that the UN named the Syrians, when this is only partly true and largely misleading based on what we subsequently learned. Brammertz, the UN investigator who came after Mehlis, dropped Mehlis’ more sensational accusations and seriously toned down the report. Most reporters at the time suggested that this was due to tactical caution in order to lure the Syrians into cooperating and entrapping themselves. But Fransen stated: “There were \u201cinconsistencies in the statements of key witnesses\u201d and a \u201clack of corroborative evidence to support these statements.”<\/p>\n The Brammertz report, however, made it clear that a new avenue of investigation was being pursued that would not necessarily end at Syria’s door. A “criminal network” was being blamed for executing the car bomb. This was a vague term, but by reading the report carefully, one could determine that Islamists, many based in Tripoli, had planned and carried out the attack. Brammertz did not drop the possibility that Syria would be connected to the Islamist criminal network, but equally he suggested that there was nothing more than circumstantial evidence to implicate Syria; this was means and motive.<\/p>\n October 2005<\/strong><\/p>\n Anyone wanting to get a sense of the impact of the Mehlis report on Syria and US relations with Syria need only scan through the October 2005 entries to Syria Comment<\/a>. I was living in Damascus at the time.<\/p>\n Here is a quote from Damascus on the eve of the release of the first Mehlis report<\/p>\n Thursday, October 20, 2005 The media Tsunami has hit. Journalists of every color have been flooding into Damascus these last few days to study the grimaces of the regime as it must submit to the delicate tortures of the Mehlis report, international condemnation, and very likely, UN resolutions.<\/p>\n A journalist just called to ask me if I could be standing by at 12:00 midnight when the first inklings of the Mehlis report begin to filter out. The main office suggests it will be bad for Syria and it wants immediate reactions. The political class has been bracing itself in Damascus and trying to manage the reporters as best they can, but everything is done in a ham-fisted way here. At such times of crisis, one realizes just how much of a third world country Syria is. Like a dear in the headlights, it has little clue what sort of terrifying machine is bearing down on it.<\/p>\n Ironically, the ordinary people are largely oblivious that their fate is being decided in the halls of distant capitals. Many don\u2019t even know that a major clash is brewing between the US and Damascus. One taxi driver I spoke to yesterday had never heard of the Mehlis report and seemed surprised to be told that America and Syria were at loggerheads. He asked, \u201cIs America going to invade?\u201d When I reassured him that was not in the cards, he waved his hand in relief and said, \u201cOh, well, then it isn\u2019t important.\u201d<\/p>\n But even those who have some idea of what is transpiring believe it is a tempest in a tea pot. They have no influence over events anyway and seem oddly detached from \u201chigh politics,\u201d as they call it. The streets are packed with Ramadan revelers looking for amusement and walking off their iftar<\/em>…..<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here is the kind of spin “unnamed US Diplomats”<\/a> were giving the New York Times reporters at the time of the issuance of the Mehlis report:<\/p>\n “There is evidence in abundance,” the diplomat said. “But to get every piece of the puzzle they need more time.” He spoke on condition of anonymity because of what he described as the extreme sensitivity of the matter.<\/p>\n Mr. Shawkat is considered the second most powerful man in Syria and has been seen as a likely candidate to take over the country if the embattled Mr. Assad were removed from office.<\/p>\n The diplomat, describing Syria as a “country run by a little family clique,” said the involvement of any one in Mr. Assad’s inner circle would be a severe blow to the government.<\/p>\n “There is absolutely no doubt, it goes right to the top,” he said. “This is Murder Inc.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here is more Robert Worth<\/strong> summing up the political stakes well:<\/p>\n The tribunal has always been controversial in Lebanon. Many supporters have seen it as a way to punish Syria and its proxies here, which they tend to blame for all the assassinations since 2005. By contrast, those in the political opposition, including Hezbollah, see it more as a political weapon aimed at their Syrian ally. They also ask why such a tribunal is warranted for the death of a billionaire politician, Mr. Hariri, and not for the deaths in the many massacres and other assassinations that have taken place here in recent decades.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Rafei in LA Times<\/a>:<\/p>\n “This is the moment of truth,” Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah member of parliament, told reporters on Lebanese television. “This is the day of the fall of the [March 14] group, which based its judgment on falsification.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Naharnet adds<\/a>:<\/p>\n Speaking from their respective homes after their release, the generals said they had been vindicated by the court and insisted they had nothing to do with Hariri’s 2005 murder in a massive car-bombing that also killed 22 others.<\/p>\n “Four generals were freed today but the only remaining inmate is Rafik Hariri and his jailer is Lebanon’s justice system,” security services director Jamil Sayyed told a crowd of cheering supporters outside his home that included several MPs from Hizbullah.<\/p>\n Saad Hariri agreed to “exchange his father for the sake of politics. He embraced people who do not want the truth to be uncovered,” he said, referring to al-Mustaqbal Movement leader.<\/p>\n “I thank everyone who stood by us, and above all Hassan Nasrallah,” he said, referring to the head of Hizbullah. “Never in the history of Lebanon have people been jailed for four years with no charge or evidence.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n US Plans New Talks With Syria,<\/a> Wall Street Journal<\/p>\n The Obama administration is dispatching two high-level envoys to Syria in coming weeks for a second round of talks focused on securing the Iraqi border and supporting the Arab-Israeli peace process, said officials briefed on the trip.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Jimmy Carter: US and Syria to restore full diplomatic ties soon, <\/a>Ha’aretz<\/p>\n Jimmy Carter on Tuesday said that the United States and Syria are close to restoring full diplomatic ties. “I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens this year,” Carter said<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Clinton Reassures Arab Allies as Iran, Syria Outreach Begin<\/a>, Bloomberg<\/p>\n Secretary of State Hillary Clinton completed a three-day Middle East trip intended to reassure Arab allies of U.S. support as the Obama administration begins to pull forces out of Iraq and engage with Iran and Syria. Clinton\u2019s message in Lebanon, Iraq and Kuwait was consistent.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Ben-Eliezer: Netanyahu will surprise us with ‘serious’ Syria talks<\/a> Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intends to conduct “serious negotiations” with the Palestinians and the Syrians, Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer (Labor) told Haaretz. The full interview will appear Friday in Week’s End.<\/p>\n “Netanyahu is going to surprise us all,” said Ben-Eliezer, who is industry, trade and employment minister, after several tete-a-tetes with the prime minister over the past month.<\/p>\n He said Netanyahu had assured him, both before and after he set up the government, that he would continue negotiating with the Syrians.<\/p>\n Regarding the Palestinians, Netanyahu’s plan will be based on a two-state solution, said Ben-Eliezer.<\/p>\n “It’s not the same Bibi,” Ben-Eliezer said. “He’s much more open, patient and relaxed. He’s not alarmed or dogmatic. Something happened to him. He realizes that he cannot afford another crash like the one in his previous term.<\/p>\n “He understands that there’s a new administration in the United States, which is neither the Clinton Administration nor the Bush administration, and that if we don’t come up with a peace plan, someone else will call the shots for us.”<\/p>\n “If we find that Bibi lied to us, we’ll quit [the coalition],” said Ben-Eliezer, who is a member of the security cabinet.<\/p>\n He said that he and Netanyahu believe the Iranian issue should be solved diplomatically, not militarily.<\/p>\n Ben-Eliezer said the Labor Knesset members who objected to party chairman Ehud Barak’s decision to enter the coalition were “terrorizing” the party, and called their conduct over Barak’s dismissal of party secretary general Eitan Cabel “insanity.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nBy Massoud A. Derhally<\/p>\n
\n“Waiting for Mehlis” by Joshua Landis
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\nBy Yossi Verter, Haaretz Correspondent, 30\/04\/2009<\/p>\n