lebanon

[moderateamericain]

i find whats happening in Lebanon exciting news for that once beautiful country.

anyone think its a direct result of what america is going over there?

im not really sure, but i do know that the lebanese people were previously arrested for mass demonstrations of any kind, the braved jail to assemble in protest. i think thats a shout for freedom of syrian opression if you ask me.

[Black Dog]

im not really sure, but i do know that the lebanese people were previously arrested for mass demonstrations of any kind, the braved jail to assemble in protest. i think thats a shout for freedom of syrian opression if you ask me.

If this is truly a mass, popular movement then good luck to them. A home grown democracy would be a good thing for the region.

Perhaps a Syrian withdrawl will inspire an end to other military occupations, such as those in the West Bank/Gaza Strip and Iraq. But I doubt it.

A Lebanon primer.

[August1991]

If this is truly a mass, popular movement then good luck to them. A home grown democracy would be a good thing for the region.

Perhaps a Syrian withdrawl will inspire an end to other military occupations, such as those in the West Bank/Gaza Strip and Iraq.

Well, Iraq just had an election and the future government will appear to represent better the Shiite majority. Now that Arafat is dead, there seems to be a chance in Palestine too.

Qaddafi is still in power though. And Assad Jnr too.

Lebanon is hard place to call. It's not Georgia or Ukraine. Let's wait and see.

[moderateamericain]

o wow did anyone see what bush said about syria? ummm wow. talk about sabre rattling.

[TokyoTakarazuka]

Perhaps a Syrian withdrawl will inspire an end to other military occupations, such as those in the West Bank/Gaza Strip

Actually, Israel is already scheduled to pull out of the Gaza Strip this summer. Most of the region is already under the control of the Palestinian Authority.

Also, that Lebanon primer is outstandingly biased. The Israeli attack on hostile PLO bases is described as an, "unprovoked invasion." While certainly controversial, few would actually argue it was entirely unprovoked considering the constant rocket attacks and terrorist excursions they were receiving from inside the Lebanese border. The article rather disingenuously claims that Israel did not withdraw until 2000. Although technically true, the Israeli army did, unlike Syrian forces, pull out from almost all of Lebanon in 1985, excepting a fairly thin buffer zone along the southern border to act as a plug against further PLO attacks. Also, among other things, his attempt to blame Arab dictatorships on the United States is extremely dishonest. No documentary evidence has been discovered to support the conclusion that the United States rigged the 1957 election in Lebanon and he goes on to completely mischaracterize the 1958 intervention. Camille Chamoun's government was actively being subverted by the Egyptian dictator Nasser. By preventing the overthrow of Chamoun's government, the United States effectively preserved Lebanese democracy until the outbreak of the civil war in 1975. Although not without its problems, Lebanon was noted throughout the 1950's and 1960's for having the fewest restrictions on press freedom in the Middle East outside Israel, a sharp contrast to Nasser's repressive regime in Egypt. Although the possibility does exist that the CIA assisted the Baath Party of Iraq, the article does not mention that the government they were fighting was not a democracy, but a dictatorship. The only genuine example of American subversion of democracy in the Middle East is the 1953 coup is Iran. Although the United States did eventually provide invaluable assistance in engineering the coup, it was in fact planned and initiated by Britain's MI6.

[Black Dog]

Actually, Israel is already scheduled to pull out of the Gaza Strip this summer.

The disengagement plan published in the Israeli papers on Friday, April 16, specifies that "Israel will supervise and guard the external envelope on land, will maintain exclusive control in the air space of Gaza, and will continue to conduct military activities in the sea space of the Gaza Strip." Israel also reserves for itself the right to act militarily inside the Gaza strip.

In other words, the "disengagement" is really about creating the illussion of progress even as the Palestinians are essentially locked down and isolated. In the meantime, under this pretense, Israel will complete the seperation wall and expand setllement in the West Bank.

Most of the region is already under the control of the Palestinian Authority.

Nope. Forty percent of the Gaza Strip remains under Israeli settlements and military installations. The West Bank territory was partitioned into three separate categories, apart from the Israeli-held settlements and annexed East Jerusalem. Israel maintains full security and civil control of more than 60 per cent of territory in the West Bank. Only 18% of the West Bank is under full PA control. Even after full PA control extended to many Palestinian villages in 1998, Palestinian-ruled areas remain unlinked to one another and the PA does not have control over security, border crossing, water or major roads.

[Argus]

i find whats happening in Lebanon exciting news for that once beautiful country.

anyone think its a direct result of what america is going over there?

A question which appears to be striking a powerful chord among Lebanese is "If the Iraqis can vote then why can't we?"

Yes, I do think that Iraq is having an affect on Lebanon, as it is on Egypt and Syria, and other middle east nations. Despite how the American "occupation" is being portrayed in most of the Arab world there is tremendous interest in the Iraqi experiment with democracy. And many other Arabs are asking each other when they will get their chance to vote for a government.

[TokyoTakarazuka]

This map made by the Palestinian Authority indicates that the majority of the Gaza Strip is under their control.

http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS.../gaza-2000.html

I agree that a lot more progress has to be made in the West Bank, but I think your figures may be exaggerated. The Palestinian Authority claims that they have 'sovereignty' over 41% of the West Bank.

http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS...haron-2001.html

I strongly disagree that the disengagement plan does not represent real progress. The Authority itself has stated that it supports the plan, which will result in the evacuation of all Israeli settlements and the end to a permanent Israeli military presence in the area. As you noted, the majority of the remaining restrictions on their autonomy regard security measures. Israel wants to ensure that the Authority will not prevent them from using extreme measures to pursue terrorists such as they did from 1982-85 in Lebanon or during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. Considering that several intractable Palestinian terrorist groups that do not recognize Israel's existence operate in the Gaza Strip, such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas, I think that this decision is wise. Regarding the economic restrictions, the agreement indicates that these will likely be temporary until all Israeli settlers have been evacuated, but even if they are maintained I don't think it would qualify as an 'occupation' since I would argue that their economic dependency is not greater that what has existed between other autonomous regions. Infrastructure issues have already been dealt with in previous, multilateral agreements but at any rate I doubt the Palestinian Authority will dispute Israeli influence in this field since at least for the time being it’s almost certainly in their best interest.

Considering all the opposition Sharon is receiving, I think it's very admirable that he nonetheless promotes the plan so strongly. I think that Sharon is defying his reputation as a warmonger.

[Stoker]

Yes, I do think that Iraq is having an affect on Lebanon, as it is on Egypt and Syria, and other middle east nations. Despite how the American "occupation" is being portrayed in most of the Arab world there is tremendous interest in the Iraqi experiment with democracy. And many other Arabs are asking each other when they will get their chance to vote for a government.

Don't forget to add Saudi Arabia to that list.

[Black Dog]

Don't forget to add Saudi Arabia to that list.

From the link above:

Half the seats for the 14 regional councils will be elected, the Saudi Cabinet said in its announcement yesterday. The other half will presumably be appointed by the Saudi government.

Further details were not immediately available, including a specific date for the elections or whether women will be allowed to vote in this strict Islamic country.

Women here still are forbidden to drive and were issued identity cards only two years ago.

Saudis cannot legally hold public gatherings to discuss political or social issues, and press freedoms are limited.

I guess in a world where the Iraqi lockdown elections are hailed as a democratic coup, then a vague promise of small elections for some of the population of an absolute monarchy are a big deal.

The problem the right seems to have is equating the singular act of holding an election with genuine reform. What the hell good is a election in a society with no free press, no equality guarantees, no free expression?

If elections alone are the benchmark for democracy, then Lebanon was already way ahead of the rest of the region. In fact, Lebanon, despite the influence of Syria, still puts most U.S. allies in the region to shame. I'd like to see how mass demonstrations like the kind going on in Beirut would go over in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Palestine or occupied Iraq.

[Black Dog]

Who killed Hariri, anyway? Apparently, it was a suicide bomber.

It seems the likely perpatrator may have had ties to Al Qaeda.

Abu Adas, 23, a Palestinian Lebanese believed to have fled the country, attended two Beirut mosques known to be recruiting grounds for the Ansar al-Islam group linked to the Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi.

Investigators suspect that the mosques have ties to Sheik Abderrazak, a Damascus cleric who has helped terrorists travel through Syria to Iraq.

The Beirut attack bore similarities to suicide bombings carried out in Iraq by Zarqawi, who leads the al Qaeda organization in Iraq.

Abu Adas, who also spent time in Saudi Arabia, is thought to have fought in Iraq.

Strange that a conecton to Al Qaeda and the War on Terror would be overlooked by the war's proponents. But then, we've always been at war with Oceana.

Meanwhile, half a million rally to Assad.

This article contains today's Unintentional Irony award-winning statement, courtesy Gee Dubya.

"All Syrian military forces and intelligence personnel must withdraw before the Lebanese elections for those elections to be free and fair," he said in a speech in Washington.

[TokyoTakarazuka]

Who killed Hariri, anyway?

New investigations have gathered evidence connecting Syria to the murder.

Assad reportedly said to Hariri, "If you and Chirac want me out of Lebanon, I will break Lebanon."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,25...30888_1,00.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/20/internat...&partner=rssnyt

[Montgomery Burns]

We just saw one-quarter of Lebanon rallying and demanding that Syria quit its occupation of Lebanon, and now this:

Pro-Democracy Protesters Riot in Kyrgyzstan; Government Says It Will Negotiate

Nope, theres' no "Cause-Effect" relationship here. None. Move along. Nothing to see here.

[Black Dog]

New investigations have gathered evidence connecting Syria to the murder.

Th eproblem with your "new evidence" is that it's the same old evidence.

. On February 14 Mr Hariri was killed when 600lb of explosives apparently buried in the road outside St George’s Hotel in Beirut blew up beneath his car.

That's the original, anti-Styrian story, which of course ignores the physical evidence of a suicide bomber.

Also: the posthumus casting of Hariti as a brave, anti-Syrian voice in the wilderness overlooks his history of cooperation with the Syrian hegemony.

Nope, theres' no "Cause-Effect" relationship here. None. Move along. Nothing to see here.

Democracy, by George?

The argument for change through inspiration has little evidence to underpin it. The changes in the region cited as dividends of the Bush Iraq policy are either chimeras or unconnected to Iraq. And the Bush administration has shown no signs that it will push for democracy in countries where freedom of choice would lead to outcomes unfavorable to U.S. interests.

Saudi Arabia held municipal elections in February. Voters were permitted to choose only half the members of the city councils, however, and the fundamentalists did well. The other half are appointed by the monarchy, as are the mayors. The Gulf absolute monarchies remain absolute monarchies. Authoritarian states such as that in Ben Ali's Tunisia show no evidence of changing, and a Bush administration worried about al-Qaida has authorized further crackdowns on radical Muslim groups.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak recently announced that he would allow other candidates to run against him in the next presidential election. Yet only candidates from officially recognized parties will be allowed. Parties are recognized by Parliament, which is dominated by Mubarak's National Democratic Party. This change moves Egypt closer to the system of presidential elections used in Iran, where only candidates vetted by the government can run. The Muslim Brotherhood, the largest and most important opposition party, is excluded from fielding candidates under its own name. Egypt is less open today than it was in the 1980s, with far more political offices appointed by the president, and with far fewer opposition members in Parliament, than was the case two decades ago. As with the so-called municipal elections in Saudi Arabia, the change in presidential elections is little more than window-dressing. It was provoked not by developments in Iraq but rather by protests by Egyptian oppositionists who resented Mubarak's jailing of a political rival in January.

The dramatic developments in Lebanon since mid-February were set off by the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The Lebanese political opposition blamed Syria for the bombing, though all the evidence is not in. Protests by Maronite Christians, Druze and a section of Sunni Muslims (Hariri was a Sunni) briefly brought down the government of the pro-Syrian premier, Omar Karami. The protesters demanded a withdrawal from the country of Syrian troops, which had been there since 1976 in an attempt to calm the country's civil war. Bush also wants Syria out of Lebanon, in part because such a move would strengthen the hand of his ally, Israel. Pro-Bush commentators dubbed the Beirut movement the "Cedar Revolution," but Lebanon remains a far more divided society and its politics far more ambiguous than was the case in the post-Soviet Czech Republic and Ukraine.

On March 9 the Shiite Hezbollah Party held massive pro-Syrian demonstrations in Beirut that dwarfed the earlier opposition rallies. A majority of Parliament members wanted to bring back Karami. Both the Hezbollah street demonstrations and the elected Parliament's internal consensus produced a pro-Syrian outcome obnoxious to the Bush administration. Since then the opposition has staged its own massive demonstrations, rivaling Hezbollah's.

[Black Dog]

A question which appears to be striking a powerful chord among Lebanese is "If the Iraqis can vote then why can't we?"

Lebanon has been holding parlimentary elections for many years.

[Black Dog]

U.N.-mandated investigation into the February assassination of Rafik Hariri has confirmed that a truck bomb blast killed the former premier, the investigation's chief said Friday.