ByAbdullah Iskandar
This comment was published in al-Hayat on 28/11/2010
The visit of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Lebanon and its program have given his Lebanese counterpart Saad Hariri a moral thrust within the framework of the regional tug of war and its domestic repercussions in Lebanon. Such moral thrust is connected to Turkey’s newly acquired position in the Middle East and to Ankara’s stance on the set of issues that arouse division in Lebanon, whether those that concern the conflict against Israel and managing it through UN Resolution 1701, or those that regard interpretations of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) and their domestic implications.
On the other hand, Hariri’s first official visit to Tehran lays for him the foundation for yet another moral thrust. The latter is unrelated to the issues in which Turkey is biased towards international legitimacy and UN resolutions concerning Lebanon, as Iran remains opposed to taking such a direction for its own reasons, connected to its suspended dialogue with the West. Rather, it regards Iranian recognition of Hariri as party to dialogue with its allies in Lebanon, and in particular Hezbollah. It could therefore help restore suspended internal dialogue and the state’s obstructed functioning, while waiting for what the indictment issued by the Special tribunal for Lebanon (STL) will bring.
According to currently prevalent scenarios, work is being done to make use of the waiting period to clarify the features of Saudi-Syrian sponsorship of the process of containing the repercussions of the indictment, and to ensure that Turkey and Iran go along with such sponsorship, which would keep Lebanon away from an outbreak of civil strife which all say they are working to prevent.
Moreover, Hariri being welcomed in Tehran tends to being within the framework of Iran preparing to go along with a certain solution, more than it is a wager on drawing the Lebanese Prime Minister towards its own stances, especially as no features of a comprehensive deal regarding the STL have yet matured, and as all of the issues in crisis are still open to all possibilities.
The conclusion is that there is no regional situation exerting pressure towards a breakdown in Lebanon. In fact, there are efforts to reach solutions being worked on by Saudi Arabia and Syria, with everything the two countries represent, and going along with such efforts are both Turkey and Iran, with everything each of the two countries represents in the Arab neighborhood. This provides space domestically for each party to reassess its goals in light of the tenet of preventing strife.
One of the priorities of taking such a step is to return to interacting on the background of state institutions, which alone remain the common grounds between everyone, regardless of the figures playing roles in them, unless there is someone who seeks to spend this dead time further voiding these institutions of their consensual content and drive towards other alternatives.
One observing domestic stances would note that there are those who are driving towards such a direction, seeking to neutralize the positive influence of a regional situation heading towards calm, and to make use of any regional escalation on the domestic scene.
Calls to boycott the National Dialogue Table and government cabinet sessions fall within such a framework, after the pretexts of the STL and the issue of the false witnesses have disappeared and the issue of the breached communications network has been returned to the table. Indeed, all of these issues continue to represent elements of tension and mobilization, as long as they have not permanently been moved into the framework of state institutions, as it is not sufficient for one party to declare a stance on them for their components to change. In this sense, the insistence on such boycott represents an insistence on not reaching solutions, and thus on justifying the dead time, reaching the danger zone without any safety valves. This means that there is a hidden agenda that goes beyond all current efforts to reach solutions, in both their domestic and regional aspects.
The visit of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Lebanon and its program have given his Lebanese counterpart Saad Hariri a moral thrust within the framework of the regional tug of war and its domestic repercussions in Lebanon. Such moral thrust is connected to Turkey’s newly acquired position in the Middle East and to Ankara’s stance on the set of issues that arouse division in Lebanon, whether those that concern the conflict against Israel and managing it through UN Resolution 1701, or those that regard interpretations of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) and their domestic implications.
On the other hand, Hariri’s first official visit to Tehran lays for him the foundation for yet another moral thrust. The latter is unrelated to the issues in which Turkey is biased towards international legitimacy and UN resolutions concerning Lebanon, as Iran remains opposed to taking such a direction for its own reasons, connected to its suspended dialogue with the West. Rather, it regards Iranian recognition of Hariri as party to dialogue with its allies in Lebanon, and in particular Hezbollah. It could therefore help restore suspended internal dialogue and the state’s obstructed functioning, while waiting for what the indictment issued by the Special tribunal for Lebanon (STL) will bring.
According to currently prevalent scenarios, work is being done to make use of the waiting period to clarify the features of Saudi-Syrian sponsorship of the process of containing the repercussions of the indictment, and to ensure that Turkey and Iran go along with such sponsorship, which would keep Lebanon away from an outbreak of civil strife which all say they are working to prevent.
Moreover, Hariri being welcomed in Tehran tends to being within the framework of Iran preparing to go along with a certain solution, more than it is a wager on drawing the Lebanese Prime Minister towards its own stances, especially as no features of a comprehensive deal regarding the STL have yet matured, and as all of the issues in crisis are still open to all possibilities.
The conclusion is that there is no regional situation exerting pressure towards a breakdown in Lebanon. In fact, there are efforts to reach solutions being worked on by Saudi Arabia and Syria, with everything the two countries represent, and going along with such efforts are both Turkey and Iran, with everything each of the two countries represents in the Arab neighborhood. This provides space domestically for each party to reassess its goals in light of the tenet of preventing strife.
One of the priorities of taking such a step is to return to interacting on the background of state institutions, which alone remain the common grounds between everyone, regardless of the figures playing roles in them, unless there is someone who seeks to spend this dead time further voiding these institutions of their consensual content and drive towards other alternatives.
One observing domestic stances would note that there are those who are driving towards such a direction, seeking to neutralize the positive influence of a regional situation heading towards calm, and to make use of any regional escalation on the domestic scene.
Calls to boycott the National Dialogue Table and government cabinet sessions fall within such a framework, after the pretexts of the STL and the issue of the false witnesses have disappeared and the issue of the breached communications network has been returned to the table. Indeed, all of these issues continue to represent elements of tension and mobilization, as long as they have not permanently been moved into the framework of state institutions, as it is not sufficient for one party to declare a stance on them for their components to change. In this sense, the insistence on such boycott represents an insistence on not reaching solutions, and thus on justifying the dead time, reaching the danger zone without any safety valves. This means that there is a hidden agenda that goes beyond all current efforts to reach solutions, in both their domestic and regional aspects.
No comments:
Post a Comment