Daily Archives: March 31, 2008

by

Does It Matter That Lebanese Nurses Support March 14?

What loud celebratory gunfire and second-order elections have in common in Lebanon.


The measure of greatness…

Two relatively-new phenomena have been taking hold in Lebanon since we got into our famed political standstill. The first is the increasing importance partisan media is placing on second-order elections. News websites are spatting over the tiniest of university elections and the old media are joining in: Today, for instance, Hariri’s Almustaqbal newspaper run a major story on its first page about the preliminary results of the elections in the order of Lebanese nurses, in which March 14 had a strong showing.

The other is the new habit of shooting in the air whenever a political leader appears on TV. Sure we had that before, but only the holiest of holies, the ones that have beards and promise the destruction of Israel got that privilege. Today, even those who promise modernity are hailed with storms of Klashnikove bullets.

All this is happening because the Lebanese can’t have a real civil war. We would love to fight but the memory of the last one is all too fresh in our memories. so we go to the next best thing: We fight proxy wars in which supremacy is measured by who enlists more dentists or whose gunfires during public appearances are louder.

Well, at least we get distracted until the big boys decide our fate.

by

Bashar's Secret Code

Does the Syrian president really send secret messages to his Lebanese allies?


Not-so-subliminal message (Photo credit: AFP)

Yesterday, MP. Walid Jumblat of the Progressive Socialist Party and March 14 bigwig accused the Syrian president, who was hosting the Arab League summit in Damascus, of “giving his allies in Lebanon the secret word to obstruct government business”. But why do those instructions have to be so topsy-turvy?

According to March 14, it’s because deniability is an important component of the Syrian modus-operandi. The Syrians are pursuing two, seemingly conflicting objectives. 1- Stall progress in Lebanon until a more sympathetic US administration replaces that of President George Bush. 2- Appear to be a constructive Arab partner to reduce its alienation and appeal to an impressionable ‘Arab-street’

Others, like the Lebanese opposition, argue that this logic wreaks of conspiracy theory. They contend that Syria has no influence over some parts of the opposition (Aoun and to a lesser extend, Hezbollah), and that the Arabs are putting too much pressure on Syria to do something it really can’t do.

So when the President of Syria says “The Lebanese should reach a consensus for their own problems”, some read it as “Our Lebanese allies should feel free to continue blocking a solution”, others as “The Lebanese should reach a consensus for their own problems”

So, whom do you believe?