Preparing to Negotiate.
It is hard going, persuading partisans on both sides of a dispute of the merits of dialogue and realistic bargaining; many Western politicians and commentators persist in talking about the assassins of Rafik Hariri, Lebanon's late premier, and now they are in full cry about the killing of Pierre Gemayel, a member of the Lebanese Cabinet. To them it is obvious that Syria's President arranged both deaths, and that he has no serious intention to negotiate at all with the U.S., the U.K. and their allies. Admittedly suspicions and misgivings on both sides have intensified in recent years, and have been buttressed by the speculation over the true identities of the murderers. Certainly some members of Hezbollah are thought to have been implicated, as well as a number of Lebanese Shi'ites, and some of the more extreme supporters of the Syurian Government, but to assert that does not specifically identify President Bashar Assad, his ministers and advisers.The promptness and sincerity of the Syrian Government's statement, condemning the murder of Pierre Gemayel, indicates that. After all, why would the Syrian leadership , who have just resumed diplomatic relations with Iraq and announced their readiness for discussions with Western governments, decide to contradict those moves, so intensifying hostility? It makes no sense at all, especially as the Syrians have stated their intention of cooperating with Iraq in monitoring andcontrolling movements across their common border.
It is much more likely that some hotheads and extremists in both Lebanon and Syria wish to frustrate the current policy of the Syrian Government to achieve some kind of rapprochement with the Western powers. It is a familiar enough pattern, the attempt to derail a particular development, and in this instance the thinking behind the killing of Pierre Gemayel was misconceived. On the other side, the split in the Lebanese Government, followed by the resignation of of six Hezbollah supporters, has been matched by a militantly pro-Western attitude on the part of those who remain in office. Pressing relentlessly for the completion of the enquiries into Rafik Hariri's death may be understandable in terms of emotion, but it is a diversion from the present issues, which urgently require attention. What is desperately needed is an effort to repair the breach between those who resigned and their former colleagues, still holding office, and to form once more a united coalition.Lebanon is, at best, a fragile state, prone to crack along well known fracture lines, so especial care has to be taken in creating and maintaining a clear and lasting consensus between the mutually tense and suspicious groupings. What, then, should this new consensus contain?
First of all, it has to follow up the usual declaration, that Lebanon is a united, sovereign state by stressing the common concern of all its various communities in ensuring order, peace and the conditions to bring about economic prosperity. In that regard, the aftermath of the Five Weeks' War with Israel last summer has been encouraging. The Lebanese people united then to resist Israeli actions and succeeded. Thus the Lebanese Army and the partisans of Hezbollah are united [A] to protect Lebanon from any further attacks, and [B] to foster reconstruction and the achievement of economic growth in the context of peace and harmony. In that respect, the presence of the enlarged U.N. observer force is welcome.
The difficulties seem to have arisen, because it is reported that the supporters of Hezbollah sought an express veto or blocking mechanism within the Cabinet and Government, to ensure that pro-Western elements did not seize control and alter the direction of policy. Those fears are probably exaggerated, but the Hezbollah supporters' wish for reassurance in the form of a policy statement, as outlined in the previous paragraph, and endorsed by all, is clear. The pro-Western grouping may have been pressing for such measures as the disbanding of Hezbollah' s volunteers and the closing of the border between Lebanon and Syria to all traffic deemed to comprise volunteers and military equipment. Certainly the terms outlined in the cease-fire arrangements at the end of the Five Weeks' War envisaged such measures, but they were, at best, aspirations, not realistic, practical and enforceable measures. Far more cogent than such unattainable stipulations are such matters as the renewal of diplomatic relations between Syria and Iraq, the conversations between them over controlling their common border, efforts by Lebanon and Syria to effect similar controls over their common frontier and the furtherance of the proposed talks between Syria, the U.S.A., the U.K. and their allies.Once the more volatile elements in Lebanonn, particularly in Hezbollah, realize that peace along the border between Israel and Lebanon is the best guarantee of their country's peace, security and prosperity, then current tensions and threats should diminish.The existence of a strong, vigilant, well armed and united force , comprising the Lebanese Army and the Hezbollah volunteers along the Lebanese/ Israeli frontier, watched by the U.N. force, is far and away the best guarantee of continuing peace.Israel, of course, should not be provoked, but simply deterred.
Faction fights and quarrels about the exact identity of the killers of Rafik Hariri and Pierre Gemayel, however understandable, divert from the main issues and betray division and weakness. Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Premier, and his supportersshould be left in no doubt that the governments and peoples of both Lebanon and Syria are at one in their determination to resist any further threats and attacks. Once that is understood, it should become possible to lower tensions, and even, to start on the long and slow process of building muual confidence and trust.
Michael B. Buck..
It is much more likely that some hotheads and extremists in both Lebanon and Syria wish to frustrate the current policy of the Syrian Government to achieve some kind of rapprochement with the Western powers. It is a familiar enough pattern, the attempt to derail a particular development, and in this instance the thinking behind the killing of Pierre Gemayel was misconceived. On the other side, the split in the Lebanese Government, followed by the resignation of of six Hezbollah supporters, has been matched by a militantly pro-Western attitude on the part of those who remain in office. Pressing relentlessly for the completion of the enquiries into Rafik Hariri's death may be understandable in terms of emotion, but it is a diversion from the present issues, which urgently require attention. What is desperately needed is an effort to repair the breach between those who resigned and their former colleagues, still holding office, and to form once more a united coalition.Lebanon is, at best, a fragile state, prone to crack along well known fracture lines, so especial care has to be taken in creating and maintaining a clear and lasting consensus between the mutually tense and suspicious groupings. What, then, should this new consensus contain?
First of all, it has to follow up the usual declaration, that Lebanon is a united, sovereign state by stressing the common concern of all its various communities in ensuring order, peace and the conditions to bring about economic prosperity. In that regard, the aftermath of the Five Weeks' War with Israel last summer has been encouraging. The Lebanese people united then to resist Israeli actions and succeeded. Thus the Lebanese Army and the partisans of Hezbollah are united [A] to protect Lebanon from any further attacks, and [B] to foster reconstruction and the achievement of economic growth in the context of peace and harmony. In that respect, the presence of the enlarged U.N. observer force is welcome.
The difficulties seem to have arisen, because it is reported that the supporters of Hezbollah sought an express veto or blocking mechanism within the Cabinet and Government, to ensure that pro-Western elements did not seize control and alter the direction of policy. Those fears are probably exaggerated, but the Hezbollah supporters' wish for reassurance in the form of a policy statement, as outlined in the previous paragraph, and endorsed by all, is clear. The pro-Western grouping may have been pressing for such measures as the disbanding of Hezbollah' s volunteers and the closing of the border between Lebanon and Syria to all traffic deemed to comprise volunteers and military equipment. Certainly the terms outlined in the cease-fire arrangements at the end of the Five Weeks' War envisaged such measures, but they were, at best, aspirations, not realistic, practical and enforceable measures. Far more cogent than such unattainable stipulations are such matters as the renewal of diplomatic relations between Syria and Iraq, the conversations between them over controlling their common border, efforts by Lebanon and Syria to effect similar controls over their common frontier and the furtherance of the proposed talks between Syria, the U.S.A., the U.K. and their allies.Once the more volatile elements in Lebanonn, particularly in Hezbollah, realize that peace along the border between Israel and Lebanon is the best guarantee of their country's peace, security and prosperity, then current tensions and threats should diminish.The existence of a strong, vigilant, well armed and united force , comprising the Lebanese Army and the Hezbollah volunteers along the Lebanese/ Israeli frontier, watched by the U.N. force, is far and away the best guarantee of continuing peace.Israel, of course, should not be provoked, but simply deterred.
Faction fights and quarrels about the exact identity of the killers of Rafik Hariri and Pierre Gemayel, however understandable, divert from the main issues and betray division and weakness. Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Premier, and his supportersshould be left in no doubt that the governments and peoples of both Lebanon and Syria are at one in their determination to resist any further threats and attacks. Once that is understood, it should become possible to lower tensions, and even, to start on the long and slow process of building muual confidence and trust.
Michael B. Buck..
posted by Michael Buck at 2:09 PM
1 Comments:
Yes, a good piece, and wise about the relative lack of importance as regards Gemayel and Hariri. They are symptoms of a wider problem rather than the actual problem itself.
The internal power struggle is, as it ever was, prone to outside interference. You have to pity the existing government, stuck between the 'victorious' Hezbollah, its foreign patrons and the non-muslim majority.
There would be more reason to hope for the future of the coalition government, if foreign powers of all sorts could resist meddling in Lebanon - and its future.
To list them briefly;
a stable, but scared Syria, deeply suspicious of US/Israeli motives in the region;
And then, Israel;
I wonder what the implications are of a neighbouring Israel without Ehud Olmert as PM.
The Olmert supporters you mention in your writing are weak and few in number, especially in the wake of the disastrous invasion of Southern lebanon last summer.
It probably won't be long before another election in Israel - and it's hard to see any other result than a return for Likud and probably Benjamin Netanyahu as PM.
That would probably mean a return to the overt aggression and interference towards Lebanon that erupted last summer.
Post a Comment
<< Home