On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it

On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Matthew 16:18

President Sleiman: The clashes in Tripoli have nothing to do with the Syrian crisis

In an interview with the Al Liwa newspaper, Lebanon's president Michel Sleiman declared: "The clashes in Tripoli have nothing to do with the Syrian crisis."

It is very unfortunate that the Lebanese President would make such statements that no one believes. All he is doing is reducing his credibility even further.

Come on, Mr. President, Sunnis and Alawis are fighting a few dozen kilometers from the Syrian border, and you're trying to convince people this has nothing to do with the situation in Syria?

I know our leaders think we're all idiots following blindly what they tell us, but please, Mr. President, do give us some credit!

I know, Mr. President, that you are trying to appease the various warring factions, the Lebanese population and the tourists who are still trying to make up their mind whether to spend the Summer on the Lebanese beaches and mountains. It would have been better to reassure us all by spreading the Lebanese Army throughout Lebanon, all of Lebanon, and showing an even handedness when dealing with your constituents, all of your constituents.

Nasrallah's Speech Regarding the International Tribunal

I have just listened "live:" the Hezbollah's chief, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, regarding the Special Tribunal for Lebanon's indictment.

The speech was verbose, but here are the interesting points that Nasrallah has raised:

1. The Tribunal is biased for many legal and procedural reasons, but especially because it is headed by a friend of the "Zionist Entity", referring to Israel. As evidence he produced two pieces of evidence:
   
   
• Cassese was invited to Herzliya conference sponsored by the Institute for Policy and Strategy in 2010, but did not attend. Another participant was asked by Cassese to excuse his absence, and the said participant qualified Cassese as a "friend of Israel".
  
  
• Cassese wrote a legal opinion where he qualified Israel as a country respecting human rights. Nasrallah, trying to show his magnanimous fairness, did mention, in addition, that the report (written by Cassese) referred to Gaza as being under "Occupation", and did criticize some action undertaken by Israel.
  
  
The evidence presented by Nasrallah is weak at best. He failed to mention the following obvious and not so obvious facts:
• Cassese is most famous for his heading the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, where he tried Serbian (Christian) war criminals for crimes against humanity committed against Moslem Bosnians. Maybe Cassese should be also branded as a friend of the Moselms, or friend of the Sunnis?
  
  
• Cassese is recognized internationally as a chapion of human rights, and has issued a legal opinion (http://www.stoptorture.org.il/files/cassese.pdf) where he qualified the extra-judicial targeted killing of Palestinian civilian militants by Israel as war crimes. This is certainly a far stronger piece of evidence of the neutrality or even hostility of Cassese to the practices of the State of Israel.
  
  
2. Narallah on more than one occasion in his speech admitted that the persons who were targeted by the indictment, are indeed members of Hezbollah. This is a new fact that even the most militant members of the pro-democracy March 14 alliance did not dare state.
   
   
3. Nasrallah stated in no uncertain terms that the Lebanese government is not capable of executing the arrest warrants, thus admitting that Hezbollah is indeed a state within the Lebanese State, and that his militia does not answer to Lebanese law or the Lebanese authorities.
   
   
4. Nasrallah accused "certain Christian parties" within March 14 of attempting to stir confessional infighting between the Sunnis and the Shia. Is Nasrallah then trying to create anti-Christian sentiment on the part of both his supporters in the Shia community as well as the Lebanese Sunnis?

Nasrallah's speech, and his arguments were weaker than usual, and were mostly geared towards his supporters, i.e the "converted". What he said was far too unconvincing to change anyone's disposition towards the Tribunal and its indictment, even the undecided.

Lebanon: Is There Any Hope?

All the media and political discussions regarding Lebanon focus on tactical matters.

I believe that the real problem of Lebanon is not General Michel Aoun, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, Samir Geagea or Saad Hariri. It's about the following fundamental problems:

1- Lack of a single vision of Lebanon. What Lebanon do we really want? What form of government, what foreign policy, what economic policies?

2- Lack of trust. Each side in Lebanon fears that the other side is out to destroy it. This is one reason why dialogue is never fruitful.

3- Each side in Lebanon tries to weaken or destroy the other side using a foreign power. This is due in part to #2, and a preemptive move to avoid being destroyed. This is akin to the mid 1800's when each community had its "protector".

4- The Lebanese public, in general, is extremely immature politically. It keeps electing the same scumbags, and believing in the same conspiracy theories. Some of the reasons for this are the points mentioned above:

#1: They have no vision for a Lebanon.

#2: They believe the scumbags will protect them against against annihilation by the other side.

#3: They have evidence that the other side is trying to annihilate them by siding with "evil foreigners"

The real question is how do we get out of this vicious circle? Are we doomed to repeat the same mistakes that have been plaguing us ever since the Phoenicians city states used to quarrel and undermine each other using foreign powers? Are these problems burnt deep into our collective DNA?

Ben Laden's Death: A Deal for the Future of Afghanistan?

There is no doubt that Osama Ben Laden's death is a great victory for the US and a morale blow for Al Qaeda.

Based on the location of the compound, and its size, it is more than likely that the Pakistani military was sheltering and protecting Ben Laden.

Based on the size and other characteristics of the operation to kill him, it is reasonably clear that the Pakistani military is no longer protecting Ben Laden.

Could Ben Laden have been the prize given to the Obama administration in order to let Pakistan have its way in Afghanistan? Is the death of Ben Laden a prelude to a deal allowing the Pakistani supported Taliban to take back Afghanistan, allowing US troops to return home?

The coming months will be telling.

The Precarious Political Position of the Lebanese Christians

The Lebanese Christians are more politically divided than ever.The divisions are not based on fundamental political beliefs, but on circumstantial factors purely linked to regional alignments.

One one hand, a loose coalition spearheaded by Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces and their junior partners made of the Kataeb and other small parties are aligned with the March 14 alliance led by the Sunnis. This loose coalition is aligned with the US and its Middle Eastern allies (Saudi Arabia, Egypt and  Jordan), and opposed to Syria and Iran's influence in Lebanon.

One the other hand, former General Michel Aoun leads a coalition that comprises the Marada party of Suleiman Franjieh (Jr.), and is tightly aligned with the Shiite Hezbollah and their Syro-Iranian patrons. This is known as the March 8 alliance.

Fundamentally all Lebanese Christians have the same goal: provide the the Christians of Lebanon with a safe and prosperous homeland, where they have a significant political influence, and won't be treated as second -class citizens or undesirables like elsewhere in the Middle East.

What divides the Christians is the path to achieve this goal.

The March 14 alliance believes that an alignment with the West and moderate Sunnis is the best guarantee of Christian survival in Lebanon. Samir Geagea and his partners believe that the greatest danger is Syrian control over Lebanon, and the fundamental Shiite armed force that is Hizbollah. Geagea believes that the Sunnis present a lesser danger to Lebanon since they do not have a credible military force (unlike Hezbollah), and that the current Sunnis leadership tends to be religiously moderate.

The Aoun-ist movement believes the opposite. An alliance with the Shiites of Lebanon is the best guarantee to Christian survival. They believe that the Shiite tend to be more moderate (despite the past efforts of Hezbollah to establish an Islamic state in Lebanon), and are quick to point out that Christians live in reasonable peace in Iran and Syria, unlike Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The Aounists also believe that the future of the Lebanese Christians is through an alliance with the Shiites who outnumber the Sunnis in Lebanon and tend to be more nationalistic. Finally the Aounists believe that the US and the West in general cannot be trusted since they tend to abandon their allies rather unceremoniously.

Both sides have valid points and the collapse of the Egyptian regime tends to show that the Aounists may have bet on the better horse. What both sides fail to realize is that their are nothing but pawns in the hands of their more powerful allies. Aoun is currently a useful ally to Hezbollah and Syria, but will he remain so once he has finished serving his purpose? If the Americans and Saudis get a favorable deal from Syria on Iraq, will they still support their Lebanese allies?

The division of the Christians is temporarily a useful hedge that can minimize their losses when one side prevails, but this same division is weakening them to the point that the Druze have become the real kingmakers in Lebanon. Indeed, Walid Jumblatt, by switching sides, allowed the March 8 forces to prevail in the selection of the next Lebanese Prime Minister.

CBC News Report on the Hariri Assassination

Canada's CBC News published a report on the Hariri Assassination, clearly accusing Hezbollah of executing the murderous operation.

CBC based much of its evidence on the investigation run by ISF Captain Wissam Eid who was able to identify the cell phones utilized by the hit squad, and traced them back directly to Hezbollah. Furthermore, Eid was able to connect the phones to a Hezbollah underground operational HQ, located under the "Rassoul al A'zam" (or Great Prophet) hospital.

The report also underlines the weak and timid approach taken by the UN in its investigation, and concludes that the Shiite militia and its operatives will most likely get away with murder.

As an aside, it is interesting to see the callous nature of the fundamentalist militia which continues to use civilian infrastructure as a shield for its operations.

Below are the links to the 2-part report:

Part 1

Part 2

A Republican Victory in Congress Makes a War in the Middle East More Likely

The Republicans are poised to control the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate within the next 48 hours. The loss of his super-majority in Congress will tie Barak Hussein Obama's hands domestically, and will force him to concentrate on foreign affairs in order to project leadership and have a chances at a second mandate.

Three world issues are significant enough to the American people that a breakthrough in any of them could significantly boost Obama's popularity:


1. The Palestinian issue. If Obama is able to convince the Palestinians and Israelis to make peace leading to the creation of a Palestinian state, he would have achieved a miracle. But Obama is unlikely to succeed where so many of his predecessors have failed, especially that the current situation in Israel and the Palestinian territories is not currently favorable to a settlement. The Israelis have moved too far to the right, and the Palestinians are weak and divided.

2. China. The American people are increasingly seeing China as a threat to US jobs and the US economy. A tough policy towards China might prove quite popular with an overwhelming majority of Americans. That is, until they realize that most of the goods they purchase will become more expensive. Indeed, most of what the Americans consume is made in China.

3. Iran. Most Americans view Iran as a threat to their security and the security of their allies in the Middle East. A limited war to destroy the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, and the Revolutionary Guard's military might can prove quite popular. No ground troops will be required, at least in principle, the whole operations with be conducted using the Navy and Air Force, with possible special operations intervention to destroy Iranian anti-ship missiles in the islands of the straights of Hormuz, and on the Iranian coastline. Of course such an operation will likely go in pair with an Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon, and possibly an Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. An added complication is Iraq where the Iranians can stir a lot of trouble, and where the US might be forced to commit land forces.

Will Obama have the courage to undertake any of the above, or any other major world initiative? The (near) future will tell. Obama has about a year before the next presidential campaign goes in full swing.

The Reemergence of the Ottomans

Turkey has entered a new stage in its history, one that is bound to have deep and lasting consequences on the Middle East and Europe. The Gazan flotilla incident is nothing but the latest signs of a new, assertive and militant Turkey.

What will this new Turkey look like, and how far will it go, is anyone's guess. But here are some interesting and telling facts:

• Turkey is increasingly playing the role of the defender of the Palestinian cause, and taking hostile postures against Israel. The objective is to appeal to the Arab and Islamic masses, and portray itself as the leader of Islamic world, as the Ottoman Empire was for over 600 years.

• Through the uranium enrichment deal it co-sponsored with Brazil, Turkey is attempting to become a player in worldwide diplomatic matters, and appear in a leadership position in the Middle East.

• The dismantling of the secularist military leadership through fabricated conspiracies marks the end of Ataturk's secular era in Turkey, and the reemergence of an Islamic Turkey.

• A number of speeches by Turkish officials affiliated with the ruling AKP party have expressed nostalgia for the Ottoman era, promised a glorious future for Turkey that's brighter than the Ottoman empire was.

• A number of AKP party officials made statements that are borderline insulting or derogatory to Arabs. For example, a recent speech by Recep Tayyip Edrogan warned Israel that Turkey "is not like other countries..." and that "we are not tribes".

It is clear that Turkey's current leadership has expansionist views, and an aggressive agenda to be the dominating power in the Middle East and Islamic world. However, there are a number of unknowns that will determine what turn of events will emerge from this new Turkish era:


1. Will the AKP remain in power to achieve its dreams, and what are the secularists plans to counter the AKP's Islamization?

2. What will be the reaction of the current Sunni leaders, Egypt and Saudi Arabia who are being eclipsed by Erdogan's Turkey?

3. What will the Iranians do? They have been trumped by Turkey's latest actions. Turkey has reportedly even invited Iran's main ally/proxy in the Levant, Hizbollah's Nasrallah to visit Ankara. Will there be a friendly or a confrontational competition between the two non-Arab wannabe leaders of the Islamic world?

4. Finally how will Turkey balance its new ambitions with its existing relationships within NATO, Europe and what is left of its relationship with Israel? Will Turkey shift to the Russian sphere of influence?

One thing is for sure, this all will make for really interesting times in Eurasia.

The Turkish Flotilla and the Disastrous Israeli Raid

The details about the Israeli raid against the Turkish -led flotilla that was attempting to break Gaza's naval embargo are still sketchy. It is however clear that the Israelis made serious, amateurish mistakes in their raid, turning the operation into a PR disaster of the worst kind.

It is true that the Israelis had no good options and were pushed onto a corner by Turkey. If they allowed the flotilla to proceed, they would have opened the gauntlet for many more "shipping expeditions" which would have opened the potential for massive weapons smuggling to Hamas. By interdicting the flotilla, they would further damage their relationship with Turkey, create bad PR and run the risk of incidents, like today's, in which there is civilian loss of life.

The Israelis chose to interdict, and ended up with the worst possible outcome. So what went wrong?

1. The interdiction happened in international waters, making the interception illegal based on international maritime law. This didn't need to happen, the interception could have happened much later, inside Israeli territorial waters. It is not known why the Israelis decided to intercept so early, possibly to take advantage of the night.
   
   
2. Knowing that the Turks and other pro-Palestinian activists were determined, the Israelis chose not to stop them using blank artillery shots, or shots across the bows of the incoming ships. They instead decided to land their marine commandos to take over the ships. This was fraught with risk. A defense expert suggested that it would have been better to damage the ship's propellers in order to prevent them from continuing their journey.
   
   
3. The naval commandos are not trained in crowd controls, they are trained killers, better used against terrorists or enemy troops. They failed to control the crowds and when some of them were abducted and they felt threatened, they followed their engagement rules and opened fire with deadly results.
   
   
4. Initially the commandos boarded the ships one by one, using a rope to descend from their Sea Stallion helicopter, allowing the activists to attack them individually, and capture the initial boarding party. It is being reported that the activists then took the captured commandos weapons (handguns and paintball guns) and opened fire on the other commandos. Knowing that the hundreds of people on the ships were hostile, a different tactic should have been used to overwhelm the activists instead of giving them the opportunity to single out the commandos.
   
   
5. The Israelis failed to jam electronic signals emanating from the flotilla, including photos and videos, allowing the activists to broadcast their propaganda before the Israelis could engage in damage control activities.

All the above is a poor reflection on the preparedness of the Israeli Defense Forces to deal with a reasonably anodyne threat. Whoever planned this operation is likely feverishly updating their resumes.

Reports of an Iranian Submarine Unloads Suspicious Cargo in Beirut

According to a number of sources, a submarine flying the Iranian flag docked at Beirut harbor and unloaded some cargo that was whisked away on a number of small trucks.

A visual observer located about half a mile from the harbor suggested that the submarine was a Russian-made Kilo Class submarine.

An even more troubling report mentioned that the crew members who manipulated the cargo were wearing "hazmat" suits, which indicates, if true, that the cargo contained hazardous material, possibly chemical, biological or radiological agents.

The use of a submarine would have ensured that the cargo would not be intercepted by the UN forces patrolling the waters off Lebanon to prevent the supply of weapons to Hezbollah, or the Israeli navy nearby.

The delivery of weapons of mass destruction to Hezbollah by Iran would be intolerable to Israel as it alters greatly the strategic balance in the region, and increases the potency of the Iranian proxy by at least an order of magnitude.

The fact that the delivery followed a direct route from the the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to Hezbollah might point to a level of distrust between Iran and Syria, or a Syrian reluctance to participate in such a dangerous escalation.

One word of caution, however, the reports are not from the most reliable of sources and may not be accurate. Similar information was reported by PJTV, an online conservative media outlet.

Mount Lebanon Municipal Elections - The Aftermath

While minor in the Lebanese political context, the Mount Lebanon municipal elections that took place last weekend have had at least one significant impact: They have clearly shown that the Aounist movement is losing its appeal within the Christian population.

Indeed, the only major Aounist political victory was in Hadeth, in the Southern Metn district. That victory would not have been possible without the massive vote of the Shiites present in the area. In the Jbeil (Byblos) election, the Aounists were trounced by a coalition supported by the Christian parties of the March 14 movement. It even appears that the Shiites in Jbeil did not fully support the Aounists, which is in itself quite interesting.

The main remaining battle between the two major Christian coalitions will be in the city of Zahle, this coming weekend. It is said that the Syrians and Iranian services operating in Lebanon are spending large amounts of money to support the list supported by Aoun and Skaff. A defeat in Zahle will deal a severe blow to the Aounists.

Why are the Aounists losing their popular support among the Lebanese Christians? While there are no formal polls on the subject, I believe the Christians are increasingly worried about the unconditional support that Aoun is offering Hezbollah. They are also worried about the increasing war rhetoric between the Shiite militia and Israel which could bring a huge catastrophe on Lebanon.

I predict, based on conversations I have had with mid-level leaders within the Aounist movement that, sooner or later, there will be a rebellion inside the Aounist movement against its leader that will lead into a new political party. This new party will bring back the pro-Lebanon ideology to the movement.

The Ouyoun Orghosh Incident: What Really Happened and What it All Means

The initial headlines were anodyne: An armed clash occurred near Ouyoun Orghosh between two clans, the army intervened, made arrests and confiscated weapons and drugs.The area where the clash occurred is known for its vendettas and tribal clashes. It is also known for hashish cultivation and processing. Therefore the event was almost routine.

Further details started emerging however, leading to verbal clashes amongst politicians, and speculations as to the real roots of the incident.

First, it is important to understand some of the history and geography of the area. Ouyoun Orghosh lays on the Eastern side of Mount Lebanon, not far from the ancient cedar "forest", in an area commonly known as El Arz (The Cedars). Ouyoun Orghosh is one of the villages on the boundary separating the Maronite mountain, and the mostly Shiite Bekaa valley. The area is rich with water (Ouyoun means springs), and there have been many clashes there, over the years, around water and grazing rights. The Maronites in the area have planted fruit trees on a series of terraces on the mountain slope. There are also water reservoirs there to collect the melting snow, and irrigate the plants. The Shiites in the area, most of whom are from the Ahmaz tribe, send their goats grazing in the mountain where the Maronite's fruit trees are. The goats tend to damage the trees, causing the ire of the Maronite farmers. The Shiite tribesmen also raid the water reservoirs in the area to dig canals to divert the water to their cannabis plantations downstream, also causing anger amongst the Maronite farmers. So naturally, the area is under constant tension between the Maronites (mostly from the Tawk family, and sympathetic to Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces) and the Shiites, mostly from the Ahmaz tribe, who are aligned with Hezbollah.

It is not surprising then that this incident took place and it could have remained an anodyne 2-liner buried in the fifth page of Lebanese papers.

Some interesting aspects of the event have since emerged and relayed to us from a source in the Lebanese Army:

• The weapons used in the clash included heavy machine guns and rocket propelled grenades (RPG's). While not totally unusual, this typically signifies a serious clash.
  
• The so-called confiscated drugs (1 ton) were in fact cannabis stems that can only be used for fertilization. The villagers typically purchase them from the cannabis growers in the Bekaa as a fertilizer for the trees in the spring.
  
• Unlike what the media reported, both sides were heavily armed, so this was a planned clash.
  
• Finally, and most seriously, the Lebanese Army commandos, who intervened to stop the clash, were one-sided, only arresting the Christians involved in the incident.

While the exact roots of the incident are still not clear, and are probably multi-faceted due to the long history of conflict in that area, there is wide speculation that this clash is a precursor to a Christian-Shiite clash, akin to the May 8 2008 clashed between the Shiites (Hezbollah + Amal) against the Sunni and the Druze. The Lebanese Christian contingent of the Cedars Revolution is left standing alone against the Syro-Hezbollah hegemony. History indeed tends to repeat itself.

The one-sided response of the Lebanese Army is also troubling: The troops involved were the Army commandos who are closely aligned with President Michel Sleiman, former Army commander. Some of the same army units stood idle when Hezbollah and Amal invaded Sunni Beirut and the Druze mountain, and in certain cases hampered  Sunni and Druze men and weapons movement to the advantage of Hezbollah.

Are we headed towards another May 8, this time targeting the Christian hinterland?

A "Sorcerer" on Death Row

Lebanese astrologist cum fortune teller Ali Sibat has been sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia following his arrest there in May 2008 while he was on a Hajj pilgrimage.

While orthodox Islam forbids sorcery, it only frowns on astrology and fortune telling. There is however no clear definition of sorcery in Islamic texts, and Sibat might very well get beheaded this week by the medieval-minded Saudis and their barbaric religious police.

Continued Saudi-Syrian Rapprochement Undermines March 14

According to generally well-informed sources of the pro-Lebanon March 14 alliance, Saad Hariri was summoned recently to Saudi Arabia and "ordered" to be more accommodating towards Syria and its influence in Lebanon.

This must be a tough pill to swallow for Saad, since the Syrians are widely believed to have killed his father. He nonetheless ordered the media outlets of his Mustakbal (Future) Movement to tone down its anti-Syrian rhetoric. The Hariri scion will also be visiting Syria in mid-April to coordinate better relations with Syria.

One of the reasons for the Saudi move is to gain Syria's support in Iraq in order to counterbalance the increasing Iranian influence there. It is unclear at this point how helpful the Syrians can be in supporting Saudi Arabia's agenda in Iraq, especially considering the close relationship between Iran and Syria, and the fact that Syria has little control or influence over Iraq's Shia community. Syria could however bolster some of the Sunni movements in Iraq and help supply them with men and materiel.

If this ultimately leads to a return of Syria's hegemony over Lebanon, it would be at least the second time that Iraq was the indirect cause for a carte blanche given to the Syrians in Lebanon. Previously the Syrians were allowed to brutally invade the Christian areas of Lebanon in return for its cooperation in the first Gulf War.

Also, if the Mustakbal movement is neutralized vis-a-vis the Syrians, then the March 14 movement will become meaningless after the Syrians were able to peel-off the Druze contingent from it. Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces will be the last significant component of March 14 opposing the Syrians.

It is too early to tell how far Hariri's policies will change beyond pure rhetoric, but if he does, he would be the second leader orphaned by the Syrians to return to their fold, after Walid Jumblatt.

Ethiopian Flight 409 - The Mystery Continues

There is still no official report on the crash of the Ethiopian airliner off the coast of Naameh, South of Beirut.

While it is not unusual for airline crash investigations to take time, some of the leaks emanating from the Lebanese government are worrisome and seem to indicate a will to hide the true cause of the crash.

In addition, there is tension growing between the Lebanese and Ethiopian governments over the not so subtle accusations of pilot error coming from the Lebanese side.

The lawsuit against Boeing that was just filed in Illinois on behalf of the relatives of the crash victims may help put some clarity into the matter. The American justice system's concept of discovery will no doubt shed much light on the substance of the investigation. Boeing will certainly zealously defend the safety of its planes and, as a result, disclose the real cause of the crash.

Walid Jumblatt - The Living Dead

Walid Jumblatt is a skillful politician, he always seems to manage to take advantage of the latest convoluted twists in Lebanese politics.

This time seems to be different. Jumblatt has crossed the Syrians at the outset of the Cedar Revolution. He has publicly insulted the Syrian regime and its leaders. He has supported the freedom seekers in Lebanon, allied himself with the West. Unforgivable!

Now that the March 14 club has failed to capitalize on its momentum, in part due to petty internal quarrels, and in part due to regional shifts, Jumblatt wants to switch sides, again. He should have learned from his father's ill-fated experience that the Syrians don't forgive nor forget.

It is my prediction that Jumblat's days are numbered, and that he will soon join his father as the latest victim of the Syrian regime, and its insatiable appetite to swallow and digest Lebanon. Jumblatt's death will be a lasting warning to all similarly situated politicians.

The Ethiopian Plane Crash: Many Theories, Few Answers

What are the reasons for the crash of Ethiopian Airlines flight 409 south of Beirut? The most logical explanation is that the crash was due to bad weather, especially considering that the plane took off in the middle of a storm.

However, the eyewitness reports that claim that the plane went down in a ball of fire and the fact that the pilots did not contact the control tower, seem to contradict the weather theory. If such report are true, then the weather theory becomes highly unlikely. Bad weather does not cause a plane to suddenly ignite on take-off.

Further, Ethiopian Airlines are the safest airline in Africa, and one of the safest in the world. The 2 fatal incidents involving the airline in recent history include a bird strike, and a hijacking.

There are more likely reasons for the plane to ignite:

1. One of the two engines caught fire due to mechanical failure, or even sabotage, causing the plane to lose its lift and crash in the Mediterranean. Since this happened early after take-off, the pilots may not have had time to send a mayday to the air controllers.
   
   
2. A bomb on board the plane caused it to ignite and crash. But who would want to crash an Ethiopian airliner? Al Qaida perhaps, because of Ethiopia's role in Somalia?
   
   
3. The plane was hit by some sort of ordnance, either ground or air fire. Again why would someone want to down the Ethiopian airliner? Was it a case of mistaken identity? Hezbollah has been rumored lately of testing AA missiles, did they launch a missile at the wrong time?
   
   
4. The plane hit some flying object, an Israeli drone maybe, or a bird. But this is quite unlikely, precisely because of the weather conditions at the time.
   

There are certainly more questions than answers at this time. The recovery from the shallow waters south of Beirut of the "black boxes", the plane's fuselage and engines, should go a long way in uncovering the causes of this tragic loss of life.

Justice Ministry Building About to Collapse

This story is not new, but another set of experts have once again declared that the building housing the Justice Ministry is structurally unsound and may collapse in the near future.

Judges, lawyers and their staffers have been aware of this fact for years. But the succeeding governments had better things to do than worry about the imminent collapse of the center of Lebanese Justice.

The bottom line is that we don't need magnitude 7.0 earthquakes to destroy our infrastructure. We can do a much more predictable job ourselves.

Abou Moussa - Outrage of the Week

Said Moussa, better know by his nom de guerre "Abou Moussa", rejected yesterday the disarmament of Palestinian militia outside the refugee camps."This is solely a Palestinian decision and not in the hands of any other power," he added.

It is an outrage that a Palestinian dictates what happens on Lebanese soil, and the bigger outrage is that there was no noticeable response by the Lebanese government. Only the Kataeb party expressed its indignation over the statement.

Palestinian weapons in Lebanon have sown death and destruction since the 50's, and especially during the Lebanese war that started in 1975 killing and maiming hundreds of thousands of Lebanese. Those weapons have also caused the death of thousands of Palestinians during inter-Palestinian clashes. A number of Palestinian militias maintain weapons in Palestinian refugee camps under a de facto agreement dating back to the 1960's. A fewer number of factions, including Gibril's terrorist organization (PFLP) and Abu Mussa's Fatah al Intifada.

What is quite mysterious is why are these organizations allowed to keep their weapons when all militias were disarmed in 1990? As a result, we have in Lebanon a number of militias that militarily control their fiefdoms inside sovereign Lebanese territory, including the various Palestinian factions mostly in the Bekaa and South, and Hizbollah over most of Lebanon.

The Lebanese government needs to take immediate action against Abu Mussa's militia and other Palestinian groups outside of the camps if it is to maintain any semblance of credibility. Dealing with Palestinian weapons in the camps is more politically and militarily difficult and can be undertaken at a later stage.

If no action is taken,  other Lebanese factions will be compelled to re-arm, leading to a dangerous race to building the same militias that brought Lebanon's downfall in the 70's through the 90's.

Haiti: A Wake-Up Call for Lebanon

The earthquake that has hit Haiti had devastating consequences on this impoverished, small nation. The imagery that's emerging is unbearable to watch. What made the devastation worse are the substandard building practices common in Haiti, and the fact that the infrastructure itself was devastated. The government and other services that should have taken care of the victims were themselves almost annihilated by the quake.

Haiti's tragedy should serve as a wake-up call to Lebanon's institutions to be prepared for a similar occurrence. Lebanon lies on a number of active fault lines and the occurrence of a major earthquake is a matter of time.

How would Lebanon fare if a 7 magnitude quake hit Beirut? Would the airport and seaport remain operational to receive foreign aid? Would the hospitals remain operational? Would the water, electricity and telecommunications networks survive?
And who could coordinate the rescue and recovery efforts? Would that entity and its capabilities survive the quake?

According to seismologists, Lebanon is overdue for a significant quake. The frequent tremors felt some time ago in the Tyre area are only a reminder that Lebanon is also seismically unstable. The major known faults are the Roum fault in  the South which has been most recently active (and was behind the deadly quake of 1956), the Yammouneh fault in the Bekaa which has been dormant, and the most worrisome is the underwater fault that's 4 kilometers off Beirut and was responsible for a Tsunami that destroyed the city in 551 A.D. There is no telling when any of these faults will cause a massive quake that could devastate the country.

The government needs to setup a disaster recovery plan, a plan that would assess the survivability of critical infrastructure and institutions, designate alternatives and most importantly set a minimum standard for an earthquake-resistant code for new constructions.

The clock is ticking, and one day it will be too late.

Red Indians?

Druze leader Walid Jumblat compared the Maronites and the Druze with the Red Indians (meaning Native Americans).

The Christians of Lebanon are certainly weaker in power and numbers. They are weaker in number because they have the skills to immigrate and be more successful outside of Lebanon than inside. This is the blessing and the curse brought to us by our excellent education system, and our dedication, as a community, to giving our children the best education possible.

We are weaker politically (and non-existent militarily) because of the Aoun - Geagea conflict (really a conflict between the Aounists and most of the other Christian parties). While the ideologies have evolved over the years, the schism still exists. It is based less on ideology than strategy: Do the Christians align themselves with Hizballa, Iran and Syria or the more moderate Sunnis, supported by the Saudis, and the West.

So far Aoun's alliances have proved to be much more useful to him than the March 14 Christians alliances. His Hizballa and Syro-Iranian allies, while using him, are granting him increasing levels of power and seats in the Lebanese government. On the other hand, the March 14 Christians are getting scraps, leftover from the big dogs.

The Dawn of a "New" Government?

It appears that after a 4-month deadlock, a "new" government will be formed in Lebanon within the next hours or days. This is good news, the lack of government caused much uncertainty in the country, and a degree of paralysis within government institutions.

The not so good news is the composition of the government: Hizballa and its allies will get all the ministries that they wanted, including the key Telecom ministry, allowing the Iranian proxy to spy on the communications of the Lebanese, and to maintain a parallel communications network that is beyond the reach of the Lebanese government.

This "new" government is likely to bear much resemblance to the previous one, despite the results of the parliamentary elections that won the pro-democracy March 14 movement the majority of parliament seats.

Not much change is expected as a result. Hizballa keeps its weapons and its capability to bring war upon the Lebanese. The country will remain deadlocked, especially with respect to badly-needed reform. And finally the Lebanese will remain hostage to the overall situation in the Middle East and the cold war between Iran and the West.

Mention of Anne Frank Censored in Lebanon School

Le Figaro, a leading French newspaper, reported today that Hizballa forced a Lebanese private school to censor history books containing passages from Anne Frank's diary.

The article can be found here: http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2009/11/06/01011-20091106FILWWW00466-anne-frank-censuree-au-liban.php

Anne Frank was a Jewish child who lived in hiding in the Netherlands to escape Nazi persecution during WWII, and died in a concentration camp. Her diary which was uncovered posthumously after the war offers a poignant testimony of the suffering engendered by the Nazis.

For those Lebanese who still believe that Hizballa is open-minded, and will not interfere in the private lives of Lebanese citizens to impose its warped views, this should be a wake-up call.

Increased Intel Activity - Ominous Sign?

The increased intelligence/covert activity in South Lebanon, combined with regional events, could be telltale signs of upcoming military activity in the region.

The suspicious explosion in Tayr Felsay (at a suspected Hizballa arms depot), watched by an Israeli drone that just happened to be there is intriguing. Add to it yesterday's explosions of Israeli "spying devices" allegedly detonated by Israeli drones, thicken the plot. The devices seemed to be aimed at Hizballa's extensive communications network.

The Israelis claim these were staged by the pro-Iranian group to detract attention from the Tayr Felsay explosion, which caught the Hizballa red handed with missiles in the supposedly demilitarized zone. The Israeli theory is logical, especially that UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army were granted unfettered access to the sites, which is unusual.

Add to the above the regional tensions created by the successful attack aimed at Iranian Revolutionary Guard (RG) leadership in Sarbaz in the southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan province. The suicide blast killed Nour-Ali Shoushtari, the second highest ranking officer of the RG, and the man in charge of Iran's foreign military operations in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Finally this is all happening withe the clock ticking inexorably towards a nuclear Iran. Indeed, the Iranians who invented chess, are constantly outmaneuvering the West in order to gain the only potentially scarce material for their nuclear program: time.

It is becoming clear that unless Israel takes action in extremis, that a nuclear Iran is a foregone conclusion.

The Unusual Cross Border Attack Into Syria: A Warning to Bashar?

What is most striking about the attack against a Syrian farm across the border from Iraq is that the US has waited so long to do this.

Cross border attacks from Afghanistan into the Pakistani tribal areas have been routine business for a long time. These are meant to hit Al Qaeda and Taliban elements seeking refuge on the Pakistani side of the border, who themselves launch attacks against Afghan and coalition forces in Afghanistan. These operations have been remarkably successful in neutralizing terrorist leadership on the Pakistani-Afghan border.

The situation on the Syrian-Iraqi border has been similar: Terrorist fighters and weapons have been entering into Iraq from Syria, causing countless deaths among the Iraqi civilians, and coalition forces. The difference is that the US and its coalition partners have not done much about this, taking blows without responding.

This raises the obvious question: Why now?

Several theories present themselves:

1. The Bush administration is trying to detract attention from the current economic crisis and is somehow trying to get the McCain-Palin ticket elected. This is a fairly weak theory since the incident is of a small impact and won't make much ink flow, at least not in the US. If the US wanted to start an international incident, they would have sought a naval incident with Iran, sunk a couple of Iranian warships, for example.

2. This is business as usual, and an escalation of security operations in Northern Iraq, in the Mosul area. Mosul is the last significant Al Qaeda stronghold in Iraq, and is supplied in men and weapons from Syria. The US might have decided to put an end to that lifeline once and for all.

3. This is a warning message to Syria. It is unclear what the message is about, but it might be related to the situation in Iraq, pressuring the Syrians to maintain a tighter control on the border. Or the warning could be related to Lebanon. The Syrians have been massing their forces on the Lebanese border and making ominous threats. Some in Lebanon have been quite anxious of a Syrian invasion. The generally well informed Debka site posted this map of the Syrian deployments on the Lebanese border.

Whatever the reason might be, this raid is a clear indication that the Bush administration will maintain its no nonsense policy towards terrorists and their supporters.

Qatar: The New Cairo Accord?

The Qatar deal among the bickering (and sometimes warring) Lebanese factions left a bad taste in my mouth. A déja vu taste, reminiscent of the " foul fool" of the Cairo Accord of the late 60's that established a de facto PLO state within the State of Lebanon.

We now have a Hezballah state within the State, since "Qatar" implicitly recognized the terrorist organization's right to operate its guerilla, its telecommunications network and other institutions within Lebanon, and with total impunity.

The parallels are striking, I can only hope that the results will be less devastating to Lebanon.

Another consequence of Qatar was to provide Heballah and its allies (aka the "opposition") with a veto power within the Lebanese Cabinet.

It is no wonder that Syria and Iran hailed the accord, but it is surprising that the West was "satisfied".

Has Lebanon just been sold to the Syro Iranian axis? What is the West getting in return?

Quoting a generally well-informed Middle East analyst: "The Qatar deal marks the most resounding strategic debacle the West has experienced [in the Middle East] since Hamas’ takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2005 and Israel’s failure to defeat Hizbollah in 2006."

Is Michel Suleiman Still Credible?

The latest events in Lebanon are casting a new shadow on Gen. Suleiman's credibility as a fair Lebanese leader, capable of leading the country to peace, prosperity and democracy.

Suleiman is suspect, first and foremost, because he was appointed during a time when Syria controlled Lebanon and all of its institutions. At the time, the Lebanese Army under Suleiman's leadership was responsible for oppressing the Lebanese who supported a Free Lebanon.

Since Syria's departure, Suleiman has not purged the Army from officers who were appointed by the Syrian regime in key positions. This may be due to the fact that he was one of them.

Suleiman's military has collaborated closely with Hizballa on many occasions, despite the fact that Hizballa is an illegal militia both from a Lebanese and an international perspective (i.e. various UN resolutions and the list of the Shiite militia as a terrorist organization by many states).

Finally, during the recent coup against the Lebanese government, Suleiman has done virtually nothing to prevent Hizballa from attacking rival media outlets, and private property including the burning of hundreds of civilian cars and the pillaging of the residences and offices of Members of the Lebanese Parliament. This has taken place under the watchful eye of Lebanese Army personnel and armored vehicles. The Lebanese Army went as far as request that Future TV stop its broadcasting "or else Hizballa would level the building" ...

Interesting Facts Surrounding Hizballa's "Coup"

While a lot has been written regarding the latest events of the week of May 4, 2008, some interesting conclusions can already be drawn:

1. The Lebanese cannot count on the West or moderate Arabs to defend them. The US, France, the UN and various Arab countries limited themselves to timid protests and appeals to a peaceful resolution of the situation. The UN's reaction was particularly weak, especially in light of the gross violations of resolutions 1559 and 1701 on the part of Hizballa and its allies.
   
2. By using its weapons and attacking Lebanese civilians, Hizballa has clearly shown that the said weapons can also be used to maintain their internal hegemony over its allies and enemies.
3. By burning and ravaging the media outlets and private businesses and charitable institutions of their rivals, Hizballa and its allies have provided a glimpse into what Lebanon might be like under their control.
4. The Assad portraits that have resurfaced in Hizballa-controlled Beirut, are a clear indication of the opposition's agenda: namely the return of the Syrian hegemony over Lebanon.
5. The Lebanese Army lost a certain amount of credibility vis a vis the Lebanese by not performing its duties. It failed to protect the civilian population from the onslaught of armed militiamen, and did not lift a finger to protect public and private property from the onslaught of vandals and looters. The Army was watching passively as militiamen broke into the Sunni media outlets and set them on fire.
6. A jubilant Aoun showed his true colors by declaring victory on behalf of Hizballa. His politburo had a tough time back-pedaling following his televised remarks.
   
7. Aoun showed the strong yellow tones of his Orange TV. It became the Christian arm of Hizballa's Al Manar TV. As a matter of fact, one would be hard pressed to tell the two apart.
   
8. The Sunni militias are an ineffective fighting force, especially when faced with the Hizballa and Amal militiamen. They collapsed entirely when under military pressure, and were unable to inflict any significant casualties on the assailants despite being on the defensive and having a tactical advantage.
9. Jumblatt's Druze militiamen, on the other hand, held their ground and inflicted a large number of casualties on the Hizballa assailants. Clearly, the mountain will be harder to invade than Beirut.
10. The Christian areas were mostly unscathed except from damage due to stray (and some not so stray) bullets coming from West Beirut. It is unclear whether the Christians would have been able to defend their areas effectively and whether the Aounists would have fought their fellow Christians on behalf of the Syro-Iranian axis.
    

Assad's Back in Beirut

With Bashar Assad's pictures back on the walls of Beirut, there is little question as to where the "opposition's" loyalty lies, and as to its ultimate agenda: the return on Syria's grip on Lebanon.

Moghniyeh: Who Did it and Why?

Imad Moghniyeh had a taste of his own poison when he was blown up in Damascus two days ago. He was killed by explosives, the way he, himself, killed thousands of people. The difference is that those who killed Moghniyeh wanted to avoid killing innocent civilians by placing a small charge is the car carrying the terrorist.

Many are wondering who killed the terror mastermind and Hizballa's military chief. Theories abound, but the consequences are clear:

• The death of Moghniyeh is both a blow to the morale of Hizballa and their operational capabilities. He was the terrorist organization's most trusted and capable operative.
  
  
• The locale of the attack on Moghniyeh is a double blow to the Syrian regime: they were caught hosting one of the most wanted terrorists alive on one hand, and they have failed to protect him on the other.
  
  
• The death of Moghniyeh is a clear signal to other terrorists that they cannot escape justice wherever they are.

The theories about the commandeers and perpetrators of Moghniyeh's killing are numerous:

1. The Israelis did it. This is the most likely theory, given that Israeli intelligence is well renowned for this type of very targeted and complex operations. This theory is especially likely since the operation is almost identical to the one, also is Damascus, that has taken the life of Islamic Jihad leader Ghaleb Ghali 4 years ago.
   
   
2. The Americans did it. This is a more unlikely scenario, despite the fact that the US has tried to kill Moghniyeh before. The US intelligence agencies tend to lack the capability to conduct such operations, even though such capabilities have been improving since 9/11.
   
   
3. Nasrallah did it. It is widely believed that the Iranians have relieved Nasrallah from his command of the military arm of Hizballa following the war with Israel in the Summer of 2006. It is also believed that this has caused a schism within the terrorist organization. Could this have been a way for Nasrallah to reassert himself as the supreme military and political leader of the "Islamic Resistance"?
   
   
4. The Syrians did it (scenario 1). The Syrian regime might have executed Moghniyeh in return for some major favor from the US and the West. Further, the Bush administration's almost simultaneous sanctions against the Syrian regime are nothing but a decoy in an attempt to protect the Syrian regime from any suspicion in the matter.
   
   
5. The Syrians did it (scenario 2). A rogue element in the Syrian security apparatus that is loyal to the Sunni majority (people loyal to Khaddam) might have conducted the operation at the request of Saudi Arabia or a Western Power (the US or France).

Other, less credible, theories include the French, the Lebanese Forces, the Kuwaitis etc.

The real question is: What next? When will Hizballa retaliate, against whom and how?

The Lebanese Curse: Reliance on Foreigners

Lebanon has been cursed twice: once by having Syria and Israel as neighbors, and the second time by having its people rely on foreign powers to solve its problems.

This probably dates back to the Phoenicians, and still stays embedded deep into our DNA. During the Ottoman Empire, the Sunnis had the power since they were supported by the Ottomans. The French supported the Maronites, the Russians and the Greek supported the Orthodox, the British supported the Druze. When the Ottomans had problems with the Russians, the Orthodox were in trouble, when the French and the British didn't get along, the Maronites and Druze butchered each other, etc.

This is still largely the case today, but the alliances are more dynamic, and often confusing. The Shiite community relies on Iran and, to some extent, Syria. The Sunnis rely on Saudi Arabia and the US. The Druze are currently aligned with the US, but will quickly switch alliances in due time. The Christians are confused: some are allies with France and the US, others are allied with Syria and Iran. Due to the tensions in the Middle East, the various Lebanese denominations are at odds with each other. We are always hoping that regional detente will bring peace and stability to the country. We monitor closely each peace summit, each statement by such or such Foreign Minister, looking for a solution to our internal problems.

How did we get there? And more importantly, how do we get out of this status quo?
I believe there are a number of root causes to this state of affairs. There are:

1. Lack of true nationalism. Because Lebanon had been part of the Ottoman Empire for over 400 years until less than 100 years ago, it is a bit normal for us to be a bit confused about our national identity.

2. Lack of a vision for Lebanon. As Lebanese, we don't really know what sort of Lebanon we want. This has never been discussed in political forums, except in destructive ways. Various political leaders have declared our identity as being Arab and wanted to join some form of Arab union, others have declared their allegiance to the Muslim Ummah (nation), others want a regional unity as part of a Greater Syria, others praise their Phoenician ancestry etc. ad nauseam.

3. Lack of trust. Various Lebanese religious groups (and we have a full mosaic worth) don't trust each other, and in order to protect themselves from other groups, they forge alliances with outside powers.

4. Weak central government. For most of its modern history, the Lebanese government has been weak, and various political and sectarian groups felt that they had to take matters into their own hands in order to protect their communities' interests and well-being.

Our hope is for a person, party or political movement to be able to articulate a national vision, and provide a strong government that will allow the various parties on the Lebanese scene to trust each other. A strong educational curriculum that teaches the young generations about their civic duties and sense of belonging to one nation will ensure that future generation will not fall into the same traps as our ancestors, parents and us.

Do We All Want The Same Lebanon?

Do all Lebanese want the same Lebanon?

I believe that the overwhelming majority of Lebanese fundamentally want the same Lebanon. I wish I could organize a referendum on the following principles for the Lebanese to realize that they really want the same thing.

Let's state these fundamentals:

1. Lebanon as a country for all Lebanese, one and indivisible

2. Lebanon should be a democracy, where individual freedoms are respected

3. Lebanon should practice free economic principles and create a positive investment climate

4. Lebanon should declare its neutrality in all world conflicts, and become a true Switzerland of the East

5. Lebanese living abroad should have voting rights in Lebanon

6. The government should offer an alternative to the religious courts that govern personal life in Lebanon (e.g. marriage, divorce, inheritance etc.) This will facilitate the transition of the country to a modern society from a highly sectarian one, and facilitate intermarriage across religious sects.


I believe that at least 75% of Lebanese would agree with the above principles. But then, the other 25% might be the ones with guns...

Aoun Sold His Soul To The Devil... Again!

It is still unclear who actually won the parliamentary elections in the Metn, former President Gemayel or the Aounist figurehead, Camille Khuri. No one had heard of Mr. Khuri before his nomination by Aoun, and the little he has said in public clearly indicates that he is indeed a pitiful candidate.

Who the victor is, is not as important as what the election told us about the state of the Christian leadership in Lebanon. Here are some findings:

• Aoun allied himself with the Devil, again, in an attempt to win this election. His allies include Michel Murr, Syria's foremost agent in Lebanon, and one of Lebanon's most corrupt politicians. Along with Murr, Aoun's allies include the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP), and the Tashnag (the leading Armenian political party who owes many favors to Murr)
  
  
• The Aounists are clearly losing popularity compared to the last parliamentary elections where they scored an overwhelming victory. This time, they had to resort to the "Naturalized" Syrians, bedouins and others. The "Naturalized" were given their Lebanese citizenship by Michel Murr when he was Minister of the Interior during Syria's occupation of Lebanon, and subsequently serve as a Murr's private electorate.
  
  
• In addition to the "Naturalized", Murr's Tashnag allies resorted to electoral fraud in several areas, including their fiefdom of Burj Hammoud. Such fraud included voting by the deceased and by electors who had long emigrated from Lebanon.
  
  
• The elections were conducted in a reasonably civilized way, away from the violence that many expected. This is a possible indicator that the Lebanese Christians are reaching a certain degree of maturity, but also a clear tribute to the Lebanese Army's capability to maintain order.
  
  
• Finally, and most importantly, these elections are a clear indication of the Christian Leadership void in Lebanon. Many who have voted for Aoun's candidate did so in protest against the weakness of the March 14 Christian leadership. It is interesting to note that Camille Khuri did not win the majority of vote in his hometown of Ain Alaq. The few people who really knew him voted against him.
  

The Need For A New Christian (And Lebanese) Leadership

The Lebanese Christians are today in a sorry state, as they are plagued by the worst leaders they have had in a long time.

The same duo that divided the Christians in 89-90 and allowed Syria to occupy the last free areas of Lebanon is still exerting its divisive influence, weakening the Christians to a point that they are marginalized.

Michel Aoun is siding with Hizballa, the Syro-Iranian puppet militia, and with other remnants of Syria's influence in Lebanon. The fact that he is doing this because he was somehow isolated my the March 14 alliance is a poor excuse. The Pro-Syrian coalition that Aoun has joined is implementing a policy that would ultimately bring back the Syrians to Lebanon, and turn Lebanon, once again, into a Syro-Iranian satellite state.

Samir Geagea and the other Christian members of the March 14 alliance have made a pact with the Sunni leadership of the Hariri clan, which has strong ties to Saudi Arabia. Geagea's Sunni allies have a history of marginalizing the Lebanese Christians, and of being sympathetic to some of the extremist movements linked to global terror.

While about 20% of the Lebanese Christians are either staunch Aoun or Geagea supporters, the vast majority longs for a more genuine and stronger, unifying Christian leadership. A quick survey of the remaining Christian leaders clearly shows that there is not one person with the charisma, power base and financial means to lead the Christians out of this crisis.

The only remaining option is the formation of a new party grouping the Lebanese in Lebanon and the Diaspora. Such a party would answer the aspirations of not only the Lebanese Christians, but also their fellow Moslems who have been disenfranchised by their respective leaderships. This would include, for example, the Shiites who do not support Hizballa, the Sunnis who don't support the Hariri clan and the Druze who don't support Jumblatt.

I believe that it is not very hard to unify the Lebanese (especially the enlightened ones among them). Assume a new party emerges with the following agenda and principles:

-A democratic Lebanon that is for and by its people
-A pluralistic Lebanon that respects all of its communities and treats them equally, accommodating their specificities
-A nationalistic Lebanon that is under no foreign influence
-A neutral Lebanon that takes no part in any of the regional or global conflicts. Such a Lebanon would have no enemies and would strive to maintain good relations with its neighbors and beyond
-A prosperous Lebanon that uses its resources effectively, and has no tolerance towards corruption
-A modern Lebanon ruled by modern laws, implemented by a modern bureaucracy, leveraging the latest technologies
-A clean Lebanon that is environmentally sound and fights all aspects of pollution

While such principles may sound naive and impossible to achieve, they are also the founding principles of the nations we admire most and we emigrate to. The Lebanese have a tremendous potential as individuals, and this potential will be boosted by the synergy of a united people.