CIA cannot keep its hands off Lebanon... it's an utter addiction since 1947...
Spies, Murder, political assassinations... and the dark heart of USA power....
http://cjpp5.over-blog.com/article-32606984.html
We can draw many lessons from the Lebanese parliamentary elections Sunday, which saw the appointment of a new parliament reflecting almost precisely the same distribution of seats between the country’s two main political groupings as the previous parliament (68 seats for the Hariri-led March 14 movement, 57 seats for the Hizbollah-Michel Aoun-led March 8 group, and three independents). Here are my conclusions about what happened and what it means:
1. The elections were important, but inconsequential. Why an individual, a party, or an ethnic-religious group decides to vote for one side or the other is endlessly fascinating and constantly evolving. It is also totally meaningless in Lebanon’s case, because the whole is more important than its parts.
Power, governance and decision making in Lebanon are defined by the crushing imperative of consensus-based rule, which means that any combination of majorities and minorities will always need to achieve consensus on major national decisions; drivers change, but the engine of this bus does not.
2. After Turkey, Lebanon becomes the second Muslim-majority country in the Middle East that can boast holding elections combining logistical efficiency with political credibility, including some surprise results that could not be predicted. Three cheers for Lebanese parliamentary elections.
3. None of this really mattered much, however, because the balance of power in Lebanon (as in the entire Arab world) is not really anchored in parliament, but in power relations that are negotiated elsewhere.
The most important political contest in Lebanon happened in May 2008, not June 2009. Hizbollah and its armed allies won that brief battle on the streets, and power-sharing contours in Lebanon have been defined ever since. This is ugly stuff - young men shooting RPGs at each other in the city and mountain villages - but in the Middle East, the modern exercise of power, like the condition of most Arab statehood, has consistently been a messy endeavour.
4. The elections generate validity and credibility, not ideological triumph. The March 14 movement affirmed that its core values reflect those of about half the population of Lebanon - though precisely what those values are remains slightly imprecise.
Much of the movement’s success reflects its opposition to the March 8 forces that include backing from Syria, Iran, Islamists and others in the region who are often critical of the United States, Israel and conservative Arabs. We always knew that March 14 represented many Lebanese; now we also have proof that it is resilient and strong. But we do not know what it represents in ideological terms other than opposing the Hezbollah-Aoun alliance.
5. We have seen again that tribe triumphs over policy. The massive turnout of Sunni voters seems to have been one of the decisive reasons for the March 14 victory. This is perfectly normal and legitimate, but it tells us more about the anthropology of blood ties among the human species than it does about the contestation of power in a modern society. Faced with a do-or-die scenario, March 14 and its Sunni core rose to the electoral and tribal challenge.
6. Swift-boating is universal. Just as George W. Bush defeated John Kerry in 2004 by tarnishing him as a coward in the Swift boat incident in Vietnam decades ago, March 14 successfully frightened many voters with its theme that a Hizbollah-Aoun victory would dry up Saudi and American financial support for Lebanon and bring the economy to a grinding halt.
7. All politics in Lebanon is local, regional, global and cosmic. March 14 won and March 8 did not do as well as the pre-vote polls predicted because of a neat convergence of: a) local identities (Sunni, Shiite, assorted Christians, Druze, Armenian) battling to claim their share of the national pie in parliament, b) regional Arab players (mainly Saudi Arabia and Syria, and Egypt slightly) exerting their influence through their respective Lebanese partners and proxies, c) non-Arab regional and foreign forces (Iran, the United States, France, Israel) also backing their favorites, and, d) cosmic forces in the form of the Maronite church hierarchy constantly advocating for righteousness among voting Lebanese that would accurately mirror God’s will on Earth.
8. Key regional and global players started speaking and negotiating with each other in the past year, rather than using threats and subversion as their main form of engagement, which lowered regional tensions and thus prompted some Lebanese to see their future as one of calm, security and prosperity. It is a mistake to see the election results as mainly an American triumph or Iranian defeat, though elements of those views are relevant. Unraveling the distinct local, regional, global and cosmic strands of this election offers a better conclusion than a simplistic United States vs. Iran approach.
9. Fatigue matters. Some independent or undecided Lebanese voters clearly remembered the 2006 war, the 2007 Gaza war, and the May 2008 fighting in Lebanon, and did not want to put the country on a permanent diet of confrontation, bickering, resistance, warfare and destruction. March 14 successfully presented itself as the antidote to perpetual war.
10. The relative decline of Michael Aoun’s movement, [which is what the west is trying to promote....when we have Aoun gaining 6 additional seats in his bloc, from 21 to 27 memebers of Parliament.] while the Hariri-led, Sunni-based Future Movement and Shiite-anchored Hizbollah both held their ground or improved, suggests that tribes and triumphant armed movements will always outperform one-man shows. Aoun's message of unity and purpose with the valiant Resistance movement proved that he is not a historic "passing" phenomenon that may or may not persist....and this is the true meaning of this election triumph, and they still carried handily the popular vote.... Shiites and Sunnis competing to preserve their communal power will be forces in Lebanon for a long time....
It is an historical fact that Lebanon was sold at least twice. The first time it was sold to the Palestinians via the Cairo agreement in 1969... and the second time Baker and Bush Sr. sold it for the participation of Syria in the 91 coalition against Saddam.... and could do it again anytime soon....
In 2005, Bush “unsold” Lebanon and forced the Syrians to leave. So whether you like it or not, the US has the power to “sell” Lebanon. And of course the Lebanese have the right to be happy or unhappy about how the US deals with Lebanon/Syria or which envoy is entrusted with the task. It is critical to their future....
Whoever is proposing these ideas is definitely unaware that the world has changed dramatically since May 2008....but the CIA is still hooked on Lebanon like a drunken troll since the early 1800s...
First, the circumstances which triggered Doha, namely the glorious coup in Beirut, which hit CIA in the butt.... are no longer conducive for a repeat which would allow tiny Doha with French/Syrian/Saudi/Iranian orchestration to pull the stunt it did in 2008. The US will not take a backstage now as it did then. How so? The counter-attack in Beirut was possible at a time when the US was in an election year. The Syria/Iran/Hezb axis took advantage of this event to pull their stunt in Beirut in 2008. It was the only window of opportunity open to this axis to attempt to re-draw Lebanon’s political map for the next six years in their favor before the next US administration is in place. That opportunity is now lost, and the attempt obviously failed as the election results have proven. A military assault on Beirut at the moment is not feasible and for more reasons than the fact that the US is now fully engaged in the area under the leadership of a popular President. An equally important reason is the fact that Syria is currently down on its knees in every respect. Mr. Assad is eagerly seeking a certificate of good conduct in order to be given some role vis-à-vis US efforts to deal with regional problems. Any attempt on his part to play a negative role in Lebanon will backfire on him. This was made evident in his much muted behavior during and after the elections, and highlighted by his phone call to SA soon after the election results were announced. That doesn’t mean that he may not attempt to influence events in Lebanon, but his room for maneuvering is very narrow....
What ALL the Lebanese politicians, and particularly those in the opposition, should be seeking at the moment is a solution made in Lebanon. It is time for Lebanon to show some maturity, and try to stand on its feet at least in the area of governing itself as it has shown some promise in conducting a flawless election day, thanks to Baroud and the 1.2 Billion USD spent by CIA, KSA and others in the Western intelligence circles to buy the elections... ahead of the grand Middle Eastern bargain with Netanyahu...... There are no better circumstances than what we have at the moment (should we use astrology and say the planets are aligned to add emphasis?) The opposition can now take the initiative, and actually turn its popular triumph into getting the most popular votes... into a permanent political triumph, by making its position on participation in the government contingent on a political program that will involve the full implementation of Taif which would also not include the disarmament of paramilitary organizations including Hezb Resistance and disarm only the Palestinians simultaneously. The last condition actually was the first US demand made by none other than Mr. Obama shortly after the elections when he referred to 1559 and 1701 which Israel makes a mockery of daily since 2005.... The opposition should insist on a gazillion number of portfolios as long as it gets a fair share (i.e. a blocking third even though it could still go at the moment to Mr. Suleiman). But it should make it clear that a roadmap for the fulfillment of Taif should be drawn by the next PM with a timeframe to make the senate and the non-confessional parliament a reality within the tenure of the next government. If the opposition takes this road it will defuse once and for all the unprecedented state of sectarian polarization which has gripped Lebanon for the last four years and will redraw the political map of the country....
