|
Let’s
get something straight. Although Syria was invited into
Lebanon in 1976 to quell the civil war, it long
overstayed its welcome. Further, it failed to implement
the 1989 Taif Accords, drawn up to facilitate its
orderly exit.
Even today there is no Syrian
embassy in Beirut. So there is little wonder that almost
to a man the Lebanese are celebrating the Syrian
withdrawal, overjoyed to see the back of Syrian military
convoys, checkpoints and intelligence outposts.
Syria’s
autocratic political system, which heavily influenced
former Lebanese governments, did not sit well with the
entrepreneurial and open spirit of the Lebanese, which
the former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri – known as “Mr.
Lebanon” – embodied.
Against all
odds, Hariri used his personal wealth and gathered
together influential international backers to rebuild
the city he loved brick by brick with Beirut’s
reconstructed downtown a stunning testament to his
vision.
With the
rebuilding of their city’s heart, came fashionable
boutiques, galleries, alfresco cafes and smart
restaurants and soon the Lebanese were thronging the
streets around Martyr’s Square enjoying one of the many
street carnivals, joyous celebrations of their country’s
renewal after so many years of bloodshed and Israeli
occupation.
It wasn’t long
before the tourists returned and soon the trickle became
a flood eliciting a demand for new five star hotels,
malls, theme parks and other tourist-friendly projects.
Hariri’s
assassination on February 14, therefore, came as a shock
to the Lebanese people, who saw him as the man who held
their future in his hands. But his tragic end translated
into a new beginning for them as fingers pointed to
Syria, albeit without a shred of proof.
George W. Bush,
Jacques Chirac and Crown Prince Abdullah soon banded
together to push hard for a Syrian pull-out under UN
Resolution 1595, which today is almost complete.
In Lebanon,
today, there is new hope in the air with the country
uniting under its cedar flag. In a country with 17
different religions and sects there are certainly
political and ideological gulfs, but, left to the
Lebanese, and provided foreign fingers stay out of the
pot, these are unlikely to be incendiary.
Hizbollah, a
militant group credited with being instrumental in
ousting the Israelis from southern Lebanon, and backed
by Damascus and Tehran, is working at becoming a
mainstream political party, and has promised to disarm
if Israel returns a territory it still occupies – the
Shiba Farms.
Designated a
“terrorist organization” by the U.S., but not by the EU
or the Arab world, Hizbollah enjoys a huge support base
and has not been linked to corruption. Indeed, it has
been lauded for its social welfare programs, which aid
its poorest members.
Recently people
of all faiths got together to commemorate the start of
their civil war in a spirit of peace and reconciliation.
But far from being a sad occasion, it was celebratory
with music and fireworks echoing in the hills instead of
gunfire.
Despite good
intentions, the Lebanese cannot rest on their laurels,
as according to an analysis by the Institute for the
Near East and the Gulf, published in the Daily Star
the current unity between Lebanese opposition parties
might crumble once their common foe is completely out of
the picture.
“What unifies
them now is the call for a Syrian withdrawal from the
country. But once the pullout is complete, the alliance
might weaken as each side starts preparing for political
gains through the upcoming elections.
“The main
struggle within the opposition will not be along
sectarian lines as much as on the leadership of the two
major sects: The Christian Maronites and the Muslim
Sunni. While the Maronite side is overcrowded with
candidates, the Sunnis lack a powerful candidate to fill
the vacuum left behind by Rafik Hariri.”
The analysis
also warns of Syria’s continued covert interference in
Lebanese affairs, while pointing out that America’s
interest in the country may not be wholly altruistic.
“Lebanon is now
high on Washington’s list of priorities. But many
analysts argue that Lebanon is not the objective but
rather the means to deal with two, so-called ‘rogue
states’: Syria and Iran, which are both on the US list
of states sponsoring terrorism and compiling weapons of
mass destruction. Washington continues to accuse Syria
of aiding ‘terrorist groups’ and holds Damascus
responsible for attacks by radical Palestinian factions
on Israel in the occupied territories.
“President
George W Bush has made clear threats of resorting to
international sanctions on Syria before considering any
military options. The State Department even received in
late March a delegation from the exiled Syrian
opposition party, a gesture perceived by many observers
as a message to Damascus that a regime change in Syria
was an option considered by the United States.”
So given the
implied US threat to Syria, which in a worst case
scenario could become a replica of Iraq on Lebanon’s
border, it is not in the interests of the Lebanese to
turn their backs on Syria, which, after all, will always
be a neighbor and a fellow Arab country. Wouldn’t it be
far better for the two countries to work together and
stand against common enemies?
For instance,
both are still officially in a state of war with Israel,
which not only occupied Lebanon for 22 years, is still
in occupation of Syria’s Golan Heights. If Israel
decided to once again march into Lebanon, once Hizbollah
disarms, who will protect it this time around? The US?
It is, therefore, imperative that both Syria and Lebanon
sign up to any future peace treaty with Israel to ensure
they are on the same page.
At a time when
Syria is being demonized by the US as a pretext for
forcible regime change, the Arab world and the
international community should rally round and put the
charges against Syria in perspective.
Yes, Syria
occupied Lebanon for far too long but we must remember
that it was invited in by the Lebanese government in the
first place and was never officially told to leave.
Contrast this with the US invasions of Afghanistan and
Iraq whereby hundreds of thousands of civilian lives and
limbs have been lost on the back of spreading ‘freedom
and democracy’. Isn’t it ironic that one of the most
aggressive governments the US has ever known is pointing
fingers at Syria for occupying Lebanon?
Syria, which
began by supporting Bush’s ‘War on Terror’, blotted its
copybook in American eyes when it strongly objected to
the invasion of Iraq. Since then it can do no right.
Syrian President
Bashar Al Assad opposed the war but so did Jacques
Chirac, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Vladimir Putin,
Hosni Mubarak and Nelson Mandela. So why is Syria being
singled out?
Put simply, this is
looking more and more like a set-up, perhaps the setting
in motion of a neocon agenda, drawn up in the year 2000.
If this sounds like too much of a wild conspiracy
theory, then take a look at the following precedent.
As reported by
The Guardian, “nearly 50 years before the war in
Iraq, Britain and America sought a secretive ‘regime
change’ in another Arab country they accused of
spreading terror and threatening the West’s oil supplies
(pipeline from Iraq to Turkey via Syria), by planning
the invasion of Syria and the assassination of leading
figures.”
Indeed,
documents discovered among the private papers of former
British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan show how he and
US President Dwight Eisenhower conspired to fake
inflammatory incidents on the Syrian border as pretexts
for a planned invasion by Syria’s pro-Western neighbors.
The report
indicates that Syria must be “made to appear as the
sponsor of plots, sabotage and violence directed against
neighboring governments.”
As it turned out
the scheme wasn’t realized because Syria’s neighbors
refused to play ball. And so they should today.
A Syrian regime
change would lead to an immense shedding of blood, the
destabilization of Lebanon, the weakening of Palestinian
militias, and the regional isolation of Iran.
At the same
time, Israel would get a de-fanged Lebanon on its border
at a time Ariel Sharon is preparing to implement his
country’s withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West
Bank. Furthermore, both Lebanon and Syria would lose
clout when eventually negotiating with Israel at the
peace table.
The Arabs,
including the Lebanese, should therefore resist the
temptation of behaving like rats deserting a sinking
ship. Instead, they should take a leaf out of Nelson
Mandela’s book and nurture a spirit of forgiveness and
reconciliation.
Syria’s record
in Lebanon is far from being beyond reproach, but, on
the whole, it has been loyal to its fellow Arabs. It
stood shoulder to shoulder with Egypt in 1967 and 1973
and it joined the coalition to defend Kuwait and Saudi
Arabia against Saddam in 1990. Few can deny that Syria
helped put an end to Lebanon’s civil war and it has also
assisted Jordan with its water shortage problem. To
Syria’s credit it stood up to be counted amongst so many
lily-livered countries over the illegal invasion of Iraq
on a false pretext.
If Syria is
thrown to the wolves – or rather to Washington and its
client state Israel – then we are left to wonder just
who will be next. | 
