The International Court is Coming Quicker than Everyone Thinks
Photo-op diplomacy and the studied noise campaign to save the heads of states and regimes from accountability has failed, no matter how much they try to drug public opinion, which has also failed at true self-determination in many countries. This is thanks to the arts of putting the public to sleep and being lazy about precision in the strategies of nations and the tactics of governments. The US is a good example of the supremacy of these arts and the practice of toying with people”s minds during election campaigns, especially when Congress or the White House carry out their duties This takes place with huge assistance from the media, and is not just a result of slick media and advertising campaigns. This is how public opinion is led in one direction or another, until a surprise appears, along with a date for holding US President George Bush accountable; Bush is perhaps now paying the price of the excessive use of the technology of words and pictures.
Damascus is resorting to a campaign of polishing its image through the western media in particular. It is adopting the technique of photo-op diplomacy to break its isolation. French President Nicolas Sarkozy is provoking jealousy by having the model Carla Bruni on his arm, followed by hundreds of cameras. However, he cannot flee from the repercussions of his policies for the future of a country that represents the principal front of the west”s relationship with Iran, the battle between extremism and moderation, and the trading a reward for blackmail for insisting on accountability in Lebanon. The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has found in the arts of “opportunity” offered by the picture and the “sentence” that catches the attention of the finest media to impose himself upon the local and international political arena, and in the battles of survival against the men of the ruling establishment, who want to get rid of him in Tehran.
One of the most important arenas of bickering and understanding, which represents the common denominator among these four men, is Lebanon. The country must be a part of any US-Iranian understanding or confrontation because of the organic relationship between the regime in Tehran and Hizbullah in Lebanon. Any French rehabilitation of Syria passes through Lebanon, where the regime in Damascus wants to eliminate the international court to try those involved in political assassinations as a reward for “cooperating” with the facilitation of a president of the Republic.
The items that politicians, diplomats, analysts, academics, Americans, Europeans and Arabs should understand is the meaning of the international court to try the killers of former Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri and the necessity of removing it from the realm of political bargaining. It”s a message of not allowing the avoidance of punishment, which will be decisive for the future of both the Arab and Islamic worlds.
A second item is the need to stop the rush toward rewarding blackmail, whether in Iraq or in Lebanon, under the heading of dialogue, or requesting assistance to avoid battles and wars. Rewarding those who send al-Qaida fighters across borders to Iraq or recruit Iraqi militiamen represents the enabling of the logic of escalation, fear-mongering, intimidation and issuing dictates. This is an investment in a frightening future, will see the experience repeated, and succeed.
The third thing is the Lebanese experiment, which represents the main front in the battle for democracy and freedom in the Arab world. In Lebanon, the battle is between the state, supported by the parliamentary and popular majority, and the militias, supported by Iran and Syria. The steadfastness of the state and the majority in the face of all Syrian and Iranian attempts to bring it down is a testament to the new qualitative element in the entire Arab region, steadfastness to confront the continuing political assassinations and methodical destruction of national institutions, beginning with Parliament and the presidency, and the ongoing efforts to destroy the army and the Lebanese government. This state of affairs is unprecedented.
For these reasons, we should pay attention to what is happening in Lebanon, where Syria and Iran have succeeded in obstructing the election of a president and creating a vacuum in state institutions, despite all of the dialogue that has been carried out with them by France and the US, and a number of Arab countries. In short, Syria”s strategy has sprung from obstructing the work of the Lebanese Parliament, headed by its ally Nabih Berri, who has actually rejected taking the keys to Parliament out of his pocket to allow the holding of elections.
The error committed by Nabih Berri in obstructing the endorsement of the international court in the Lebanese Parliament is that the court is no longer influenced by the Lebanese, and will bring even more nightmares to those guilty of the crimes. Today everyone who is wagering on the destruction of Lebanon”s state institutions as a means to abolish the court will fall into a similar trap. They should be aware of the following: the international court is no longer in the hands of the Lebanese government, presidency, Parliament and state. It”s now the property of the international community.
It”s time to draw the attention of those concerned to the fact that there is no room for political bargaining and deals to avoid the court, which will try those involved in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri and his comrades, and the other assassinations of MPs, journalists and intellectuals, and the leading members of the Lebanese Army. These are all terrorist assassinations, according to the official definition of the UN Security Council. No friendly country, or country ready to bargain, can stop the court.
Perhaps Damascus did not err but rather bought time, by using Nicolas Sarkozy”s acceptance of Syria and George Bush”s belief that he can pay attention to Lebanon and forget about it the next, with not cost. Perhaps Damascus saw political and media seduction as a case of the time being right for a campaign to cozy up to some Arab states, to make Syria”s hosting of the Arab Summit in March a success.
Damascus is being eaten up by its obsession with Lebanon and the international court and is trying to use its alliance with Iran to bargain over the survival and rehabilitation of its regime. Therefore, it uses photo-ops as a tactical opportunity in its strategy of breaking its isolation and being rehabilitated.
France has stumbled and Jordan as well, for special reasons. Each has given Damascus the opportunity of using the media to make gains. The French say that their president has spoken repeatedly on the phone, and the Jordanians say that King Abdullah II will not bargain over Lebanon or enter negotiations over the Lebanese presidency, as the French have done. Both believe in giving Syria a golden opportunity and if this opportunity isn”t taken, no one will help Damascus exit its predicament. Some peddle the idea that it is impossible to split Damascus from the regime in Iran, which leaves the fundamental question: what do we do with Syria when it moves outside the Arab fold?
Of course, this isn”t the first time that Syria has strategically allied with Iran. Syria has played the Iranian card repeatedly with the countries of the Gulf, and especially during the Iran-Iraq War which began in the 1970s and lasted until the 1980s. However, this is a completely different time. It is a time of accountability and being put on trial.
The Arab countries that are testing their attractiveness with the Syrian leadership to influence Damascus regarding its ties with Iran should be careful. They are not in a position that enables them to ask Damascus for things, unless they present gifts ahead of time and supply the photo-op to break its isolation.
The Jordanian monarch might be committed to Lebanon and consider it a red line, but merely participating in the breaking of the isolation of Syria, at a time when Syria is laying siege to the presidency of Lebanon in order to impose a vacuum, might offer a service to Syria at the expense of Lebanon, even if this is unintentional.
Some decision-makers in Arab capitals believe that the interest of their countries requires jumping to normalizing relations with Damascus, in the assumption that the US will not fight the Syrian regime for the sake of Lebanon, because it has decided to not hold it accountable for what it has done in Iraq, even though this has led to the killing of Americans there. They believe that the international court will take years before verdicts are issues and they say that their countries cannot tolerate waiting for five years before setting down foreign policies toward an Arab state. They believe the promises, despite all of the warnings by others who have already tried Damascus” promises, which have remained ink on paper on more than one occasion. Their position is that the Arab Summit is an opportunity, that the Syrian-Palestinian relationship is the basis, since the goal is facilitating the establishment of a Palestinian state, and that bilateral arrangements are of course important, as long as Lebanon remains under testing.
This is exactly what French and US diplomacy feel. Lebanon is a test of Syria. The problem with this idea is that all of those who support it have not been tested.
It”s certain that the US-French alliance has begun to lose its patience with Syria; the openly-made comments to this effect by Bush and Sarkozy are not statements made in passing, but they are not enough. Damascus has ignored the carrot and the stick from Washington and Paris. It has insisted on intervention and obstructing the election of a Lebanese president, because it sees a continued vacuum as being in its interest. This is a valuable lesson that should be built on, in view of a number of considerations.
George W Bush has been unable to secure confidence in his efforts toward Palestine, as long has he doesn”t take effective measures in Lebanon before traveling to Palestine and Israel; this will restore confidence in him and the US. The goal here is not a competition between Palestine and Lebanon, but the contrary. Both are subject to the tampering of Syria and Iran, and Israel.
Bush must take concrete steps toward Syria to inform it that the US is serious about Lebanon. I don”t mean silly measures, but other options that are available to Washington, Paris and New York. The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, is not responsible for translating the meeting and statement that were issued by a group of states in Paris, at his initiative.
He was delegated by these countries – the US, the UK, the European troika (France, Spain and Italy), Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, Jordan, and the presidency of the European Union and the European Commission. It”s now time for the next step
The message that will be issued by the Security Council when it discusses and measure is clear: Damascus has been obstructing things and trying to impose a methodical vacuum on the institutions of the Lebanese state. It”s now time to be held accountable.
The international court is coming, sooner than many people think.