To the Leader of Hezbollah, storming the camp to crush the terrorists would convert Lebanon into a battleground between Al-Qaeda and America

Nasrallah Suggested that

The problem in the north can be solved politically and through the judiciary in a way that protects the Lebanese army, our Palestinian brothers, the state and peace and stability without transforming Lebanon into a battleground in which we fight al-Qaida on behalf of the Americans.

This is why he’s washing his hands of such a potential confrontation:

The Nahr el-Bared camp and Palestinian civilians are a red line. We will not accept or provide cover or be partners in this

What do you think? Does he have a point or is he peddling Assad’s line ?

It is time to set aside comparisons between the July war and the Lebanese anti-terrorist operation in Naher Al Bared.

cartoon (14march.org)

It is tempting to compare Israel’s July war on Lebanon with the Lebanese Army’s shelling of the Nahr el Bared camp. After all, both Armies were responding to an unprovoked terrorist attack and both armies were shelling hideouts filled with civilians. But this is where the comparisons should end.

During the July war, Hezbollah fighters were hiding among people who love, support and protect them. The multinational Fateh al Islam terrorists on the other hand are, by unanimous Palestinian testimony, outsiders who are not welcome. Palestinian civilians who are fleeing the camp are being embraced by Lebanese residents and aid groups in all Lebanese areas. I have word of mouths from people in Minieh, Tripoli and Akkar that many families, after hearing Seniora’s speech, are taking Palestinian refugees in their homes.

In the July war, Israel was shelling indiscriminate locations (like the bridges in Jounieh, which is an all-Christians area) while the Lebanese Army was careful to only target locations with militant presence, resulting in minimal civilian casualties. Also, Seniora’s pledging that he has nothing against our Palestinian brothers is much more believable that Olmerts’ claims that he cares about the Lebanese people.

As the showdown approaches, the Lebanese Army will have the unanimous support of Lebanese and Palestinians. Otherwise, why would Ass’aad bu khalil, the Aljazeera of the Blogosphere, lament:

I have never felt more isolation as someone who speaks out on Palestine as I have felt in the past few days. There is an overwhelming, unanimous competition by people and organizations to rally behind the Lebanese army and to pay tribute to the troops. Not a single political party in Lebanon has spoken out, none, against the indiscriminate shelling of the refugee camp

The PSP leader, like the rest of the Lebanese, is not happy at all with Aljazeera. He accuses it of being complicit in the crimes happening in Lebanon. He also addresses directly the ruler of Qatar and asks him not to take sides (here’s why the Lebanese are fuming from Aljazeera’s coverage), also Jumblat’s interview with Al-Sharq Al Awsat on the same subject, picked up by Alarabiya

(Remember, if you like this post, you can always bookmark it for future use with the bookmarking tools below)

The veteran Saudi commentator sees that unleashing iraqi-style Alqaeda Islamists to scuttle the Hariri Tribunal means that the Tribunal is now about much more than finding Hariri’s killer. It’s about finding Bin Laden himself.
Far fetched? you judge (Arabic)

After the explosions in (Christian) Ashrafieh and (Sunni) Verdun,  Aley, a popular Druze summer destination was hit. Can Walid Jumblat calm his constituents this time?

This time though, the smoke is not natural..

If one was to choose the single event which contributed most to sparking a Sunni-Shiaa strife in Iraq, one would chose the bombing of the Al-askari Mosque in Samarra. The bombing of a historic Shiaa mosque was seen by many as the straw that broke the Shiaa camel’s back, and initiated the cycle of revenge killings.

What does this have to do with Walid Jumblat, the leader of the Lebanese Druze?

To understand, one has to go back a bit to the ziad & ziad murder incident, where two partisans of Walid Jumblat were publicly kidnapped, killed, and maimed to the shock of the Lebanese. Back then, the Druze were seeing red and screaming for revenge, but their leader disappointed them by calling for calm.

The killers turned out to be, as everyone suspected, members of the Shamas family, who are Hezbollah sympathizers and who are now hiding from justice in one of their security zones. By calling for calm, Walid Jumblat had averted a potential bloodbath between the Shiaas and the Druze.

Fast forward to today, an explosion rocks a prosperous Druze Mountain village, and Hezbollah’s condemnation will probably be lukewarm as usual. There are no guarantees that the overzealous Druze will listen to their leader this time.

What this explosion clearly shows, is that March14 is the Target.

It is obvious is that the explosions targeted Druze, Christian and Sunni locations (those religious groups being the chore constituents of March 14). What is less obvious is that all those targets are also touristic hotspots (The Aley explosion was in a shopping area). Businessmen, another March14 constituency, are now lamenting the fatal blow that hit the Summer season (Aley being the favorite mountain destination of Wealthy Gulf tourists).

Whoever is doing this knows this country very well..

The coverage of the recent fights between the Lebanese army and Fateh Al Islam has resulted in a mass exodus of Lebanese audiences away from Aljazeera.

The latest wave of Lebanese to shun Aljazeera didn’t do so because of distaste of free media. They have simply had it with their biases.

“I used to be upset with Aljazeera for giving as much air-time to Syrian regime apologists as to pro-independence Lebanese law-makers”, said Mr. Azzam, a Lebanese Sunni trader in this African country. “I was okay with it and thought it’s a good source of information about the other side’s point of view. But the way it covered the Nahr el bared fighting is simply outrageous. I don’t want to watch it anymore”

What Mr. Azzam -and many like him in my non-scientific sample of around 50 people- was referring to is Aljazeera’s portrayal of the Lebanese army as a ruthless aggressor, and its insinuation that it’s acting like the Americans and Israelis. Aljazeera gave high exposure to civilian casualties, and minimized coverage of the cause of the fighting, namely, the unprovoked and deliberate attack by the terrorists on the Lebanese army.

To add insult to injury, Aljazeera refers to the shelling targets as “what the Lebanese Army says are militant hideouts,” casting doubt on our military’s judgment the same way it does when it says “Israel bombed what is says are hamas weapon factories”

Their coverage was obviously very far from the mood of the country, and some watchers might tune back in when things get calm again. But for many, the move is permanent.

“Al-Arabiya was way more balanced, I even preferred watching (the American funded) Al-Hurra” Mr. Azzam concluded. And so far, they all seem to agree.

PS: After reading the comments below and responding if you want, don’t forget to watch the video of Walid Jumblat castigating Aljazeera or read Elie ferzli’s piece and Diana Mukalled’s piece