We Have A President (Probably)!

Hariri's Future Movement just announced that it will support a constitutional amendment to allow General Michel Suleiman to ascend to the Presidency. As far as I know, the other March 14 players haven't commented on this yet -- and Geagea's reaction will be particularly interesting -- but it's hard to imagine that Hariri would do this without first ensuring that he would get his way.

A few quick notes. First, I was obviously wrong that the Presidential issue would be frozen until after Annapolis. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Second, it's going to be interesting to see how alliances shift following the vote. Specifically, whether Aoun's bloc stays behind him, whether Hezbollah and Amal remain united, and what Jumblatt and Geagea say. Third, there's going to be a lot of questioning about whether Sleiman is an acceptable compromise for March 14. Me, I'm not too sure. But we will see, won't we?

Is Lebanon On the Table In Annapolis?

I know some of you are skeptical that America would cut a regional peace deal in Annapolis at the expense of Lebanon. And I agree that the odds are against it -- but there is enough of a chance for the pro-independence Lebanese to start sweating.

Exhibit one is this Nicholas Blanford article. At the very least, Lebanon's Presidential election is on hold pending the outcome of Annapolis. Both Syria and America want to see what kind of deal they can get before making their next move. "There's been a very clear link in the past two weeks between the Lebanon crisis and Annapolis," says Ibrahim Hamidi, a Damascus correspondent for al-Hayat. Foreign Policy also believes that America dialing down its support of the Siniora government is a prerequisite for peeling Syria away from Iran.

If America would resist trading away Lebanese independence, it should be obvious that Lebanon's southern neighbor wouldn't hesitate for a second. After completing its withdrawal, Israel's only concern is maintaining the UNIFIL troops as a buffer to Hezbollah in South Lebanon. In this post, a prominent Israeli blogger lays out a wide-ranging Middle East peace deal -- that blithely signs away Lebanese independence in a few short sentences.

"So here's the deal. Syria abandons Iran and embrace the US. In other words, become a US ally and beneficiary. In exchange the US could drop all investigations against its leaders for the assassinations in Lebanon and allow Syria to be the controlling power in Lebanon just as it did to end the civil war there in 1989 pursuant to the Taif Agreement. Thus Lebanon would become stable and remain in the US camp. To further strengthen this camp, Syria would have to abandon all rejectionist forces including Hezbollah, Hamas and the others.

...and then Syria could hold free and fair elections, legalize gay marriage, and Bashar al-Assad could have Shabbat dinner with Omert. Really, he'd do all this -- just give him Lebanon back!

Syria Today (And For Three Years Running)

Andrew Tabler runs Syria Today, a English-language monthly magazine based in Damascus. Earlier this month, they celebrated their third anniversary -- a proud moment for any startup magazine, and even more of one that operates in Syria's repressive media environment. To mark the occassion, Tabler wrote an account of the differences between Syrian and American cultures when it comes to business and media, and his experience walking the line with the Syrian censors:

"Because of the Syrian government's strict adherence to secular politics, we rarely raise the issue of religion in Syria Today. But we are able to engage in rich debate while grounded in very different cultures. American culture is explicit, freedom-loving, and straightforward. Syrian culture is more indirect, nuanced and hierarchical -- the latter not only due to Syria's authoritarian system of government, but also because of traditional patriarchal family structures. Perhaps this is why one doesn't hear much in Syria about Western business ventures with Arab entrepreneurs; subtlety suits Syrians because involvement with Westerners could be used against them. In the West, we often shout about such things from the rooftops. It's a matter of style, not substance."

Tabler is not under any illusions that he can cover every issue without regards to Syrian repression, but I think his magazine nevertheless provides a useful source of information about Syria to the outside world. And it is surprising how willing he is to push the envelope. He calls the work of the daily Syria Times as "convoluted, Orwellian-style propaganda," and characterizes the last 40 years of Syrian government as "badly administered Soviet-style socialism." Tabler knows as much about Syria as any American I've read, and his voice is a valuable addition to our base of knowledge. Happy birthday, guys.

This Is Sort Of Awesome

Now that Lebanon is finally on the rebound from a destructive relationship with its last man, Cairo-based journalist Hannah Alam sets out to find the country a good match:

"Failed state seeks new date.: Country of good-looking, beach-going people who killed one another for 15 years ISO strong, presidential type. Let's start with reconciliation and statesmanship, and see what happens. We're not into sectarianism, we swear, but our ideal match must be a Maronite Christian. Eloquent and bold in a Nasrallah kinda way, sans the beard and turban. Sedate and reliable like Saniora, except not a crybaby when the Israelis come calling. All inquiries should be sent directly to the American or French embassies (no ticking or oddly shaped packages, please). Letters postmarked Damascus or Tehran will be returned to sender. Can't wait to hear from you! No, seriously, we can't wait...it's in the constitution.

What Arab-Israeli Crisis?

As the Arab foreign ministers fly to Annapolis, this New York Sun article wonders what crisis needs to be solved at the peace conference. Especially with no foreseeable end to the Fatah/Hamas infighting, the Israelis and their allies see the Arab-Israeli conflict as a rather lopsided "crisis." Sure, the Palestinians are still a nation without a state and Israeli actions are still able to work Arab populations into a lather. But the Israeli army remains strong, the economy is outpacing their Arab neighbors, and they are demographically stable. The Golan Heights haven't been militarily contested in 34 years. For those who rank Arab distress rather low on their list of concerns -- and the New York Sun certain qualifies -- it is unclear why Israel should be willing to sacrifice much at Annapolis.

Coupled with Syrian intractability, this is just another reason not to expect any diplomatic breakthroughs this week. The article suggests abandoning the pretense of forging a wide-ranging peace in the Middle East this week, and instead focus on the actual crisis in Lebanon.

"If the Bush administration's goal is to wring out new Israeli concessions for an elusive peace, potentially destabilizing the one stable democracy in the Middle East, Annapolis will lead nowhere, or at least nowhere worth leading to. On the other hand, supporting democratically oriented forces in Lebanon, as well as the rest of the Arab and Muslim world, is a worthy cause.

Can Annapolis be used to unite the Arab states in a sharp warning to Syria and Iran, regarding continued obstruction in Lebanon? Would that even have any tangible effects? I don't pretend to have the answers. But they certainly are interesting questions.

A Christian President, or President of the Christians?

Every once in a while, normally in the foreign press, you still see Aoun described as a non-sectarian leader. Hopefully, articles such as this one will put this idea to rest:

"'I enjoy Christian representation whether they like it or not,' Aoun warned. 'I'm known to represent 66 percent of the Christians. and whoever enjoys 66 percent has decision rights.'

'Anyone from the other (political) side who does not acknowledge me, will not be acknowledged by me,' Aoun went on."

Leave aside the second part of the quote, which is merely egomaniacal. As it has become increasingly clear that March 14 is not going to back his candidacy, Aoun has repeatedly pointed to his position as the supposed leader of Lebanese Christians. Strange grounds for a supposedly non-sectarian leader to base his authority on. I'm not sure what the "decision rights" are that General Aoun thinks he has, but both sides could use a refresher on the rules of the game.

It's depressing to see that Lebanon has grown more sectarian than even the Taef Accord, which enshrined the confessional political system. The Constitution is perfectly clear that the President is elected by Parliament, which is divided equally between Christians and Muslims. The office is chosen by the representatives of the Lebanese nation, not representatives of the Lebanese Christians. The March 14 Christians, as well as Aoun, have started to see it as some sort of private fiefdom instead of a national office. If they have some secret list of rules that govern Presidential elections, I invite them to share.

Is Lebanon In the Hands Of Annapolis?

It seems increasingly clear that there won't be any movement on the Presidential front until after the results of Bush's Mideast peace initiative in Annapolis are clear. All the Arab states are probably coming, including Lebanon, with Syria being the only country still wavering. Today, Syrian lawmakers are making favorable noises towards Annapolis, and the general consensus is that they can't pass up a large stage to make their case on the Golan Heights.

For all of the Bush Administration's lofty talk about Lebanon as a democratic model and an important ally in the region, the hard fact remains that Syria's cooperation is far more vital to US interests in the region. The United States does not want to push for an absolute majority President in Lebanon before it sees what Syria is willing to offer at Annapolis. And if you are confident that Bush would not trade away Lebanese independence for, say, Syria dropping its support of Hamas (as part of a larger deal to strengthen Fatah's Abbas) and a resolution of the Golan Heights issue -- well, you're more optimistic than I am. A large part of Tarek Mitri's job at Annapolis may consist of eavesdropping on the conversations between Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Mouallem and Condoleeza Rice.

Syria might want to keep Lebanon's Presidency vacant until Annapolis as well, because it gives them another bargaining chip in negotiations with the United States. Still, I doubt that Syria and the United States are going to be able to make a deal. The Syrian-Iranian alliance still seems strong, and Syria has not exactly rushed to attend Annapolis. If the conference ends in failure and Lebanon is still without a President next week, the United States could revert to confrontation and support an absolute majority President. But, as of today, we are all stuck in a holding pattern.

Things Fall Apart

I do not want to comment in detail on Aoun's six-point "salvation" plan, because it doesn't really warrant it. Blacksmith Jade has an excellent post on Aoun's proposal, which expresses what I would have wrote, only better. Suffice it to say that Aoun's plan is insanely undemocratic, unconstitutional, and against the interests of the March 14 coalition that the fact it was rejected should not come as a surprise, or be lamented.

The real problem is that we're heading in the wrong direction -- the "salvation" proposals are getting further and further away from actually achieving consensus than they were a month ago. In the entire time it took for Aoun to make his proposal and for March 14 to shoot it down, I had Thanksgiving dinner. And at this moment, the two sides have 15 hours to reach consensus before the whole process really flies off the rails. Sorry, I just don't see it happening.

March 14 has announced they'll go to Parliament tomorrow and elect a President based on a simple majority. If they do, good for them -- though announcing their intentions the day before makes them seem unsure of their own cause. They should have agreed among themselves weeks ago about a contingency plan, should this day come about. Anyway, I'll believe it when I see it. I'm learning not to trust that yesterday's news will evolve into tomorrow's facts in this situation.

Who Is Michel Edde, And Why Should He Be President?

When even the American press is starting to sound conciliatory, you know that compromise is in the air over Presidential negotiations.

The most prominent octogenarian currently being mentioned is Michel Edde. His father was held important government positions -- in the Ottoman Empire! Everyone who is excited to begin the Michel Edde era, please raise your hands now.

The problem with Edde is that he risks perpetuating the deadlock that has characterized Lebanese politics for the last year. On the major issues of the day -- the international tribunal, Syrian influence in Lebanon, Hezbollah's weapons -- he can be expected to do nothing at all. That is, after all, why he is a consensus candidate. The "consensus" is to do nothing.

That said, nothing is set in stone. If the negotiations were finished, the MPs would be at Parliament right now. But Hariri, Jumblatt, and Geagea should ask each other very seriously what their Parliamentary majority can expect to accomplish during a Michel Edde Presidency. And they should remember that coalitions that swept into power with grand ideals and then presided over a period of deadlock and stagnation are rarely rewarded by voters, come election time.

Wait til Friday

The Presidential session will likely be postponed once again, until mere hours before the end of President Lahoud's term. This whole process appears so farcical, I think it is hard for most Lebanese to take the notion that the country is heading towards two governments seriously. It just seems like a bad joke.

Now the Syrian Regime Has Gone Too Far!

Bashar al-Assad has blocked Facebook. That bastard. MEMRI suggests that the Syrian government was afraid of the Israelis learning one of the many national security secrets readily available on Facebook. But I just think Bashar was tired of being poked.

Try To Stay Positive

I have had time to write lately, I simply have not had much to say. The Presidential elections are currently the only story in town, but there have been no developments worth noting. In retrospect, Nasrallah's speech on the November 11th, and Aoun's remarks throughout the week, signaled the opposition's adoption of a hard-line stance, which has essentially de-railed the possibility of consensus. Both sides are unwilling to elect one of the weak, "octogenarian" Presidential candidates, not only because the Christians insist on a strong President but because the stakes are simply too high to support someone who may not have their back when the chips come down. In this regard, it is hard to blame either side.

Essentially, the ball is in the government's court. If there is no consensus, which is overwhelmingly likely at this point, two governments will be formed. The opposition will try to escalate the crisis in order to build support for an emergency "stability candidate" -- most likely Michel Sleiman. The March 14 coalition will need to elect their own President with as wide a base of support as possible. It should be someone who can credibly be seen to keep tensions as low as possible, and the ability to build bridges among other communities. It's a race for legitimacy. Gentlemen, start your engines...

The Hariri Interview

You should probably read NOW Lebanon's interview with Saad Hariri in full. He steps back and discusses the big picture in Lebanon, which I think is actually a strength of the interview. It's not just asking him the same obvious questions he must answer a hundred times a day. Because of that, I think the interview contained some revelations that it wouldn't have otherwise. (Full disclosure: I've worked at NOW in the past, and still write for them every once in a while)

America's Isolation Of Syria Is A Joke

Remember how the United States passed restrictive trade sanctions against Syria in 2003? Remember how those sanctions were renewed, with much press attention, every year since? And it's hard to forget President Bush's repeated condemnations of the Syrian government. Well, apparently it was all just hot air. Sorry about that. The United States has been providing the Syrian regime with high-tech exports, under the United Nations Development Program:

"It appears that UNDP, the U.S., and yet another partner in Syria's 'customs modernization,' the European Union, have been engaged in a game of incentive diplomacy with the Assad regime, quietly laying the building blocks for a broader trade-for-peace framework with Syria and its neighbors while talking tough and brandishing trade and financial cudgels that are less than meet the eye."

Read the whole thing. Essentially, the United States is providing the Syrian regime with "sophisticated surveillance equipment" through the UNDP. Syrian purchases of the equipment have been approved by the UNDP's executive board, on which the United States has a seat. Cisco, the US-based company that makes equipment, is subject to the export ban to Syria.

What an embarassment. If I was a Congressman who was serious about isolating Syria, I would be up in arms about Congress's laws being circumvented. If I was President Bush, who routinely blasts Syria for its human rights abuses and murderous role in Lebanon, I would be ashamed.

List Of Eight

The New York Times profiles what they see as Lebanon's eight most likely Presidential candidates. For anyone following the Presidential election closely, there's not going to be much here that's surprising. It includes the Big Four -- Lahoud, Harb, Aoun, Suleiman -- and then four lower-profile "compromise" options -- Joseph Tarabay, Robert Ghanem, Chakib Kortbawi (who I know absolutely nothing about), and dark horse candidate Damianos Kattar.

The real significance of the list, I'd say, lies in the sheer number of people the Times had to profile. Normally, a week before a Presidential election, the list of realistic candidates has been narrowed to two or three -- not eight. The wide spectrum of possibilities speaks to the fluidity of the situation right now. Nothing has been decided yet. We're at the same stage of the negotations as we were three months ago. And that doesn't make me feel optimistic.

Around the World

With the Lebanese political situation stalled, I thought I'd turn to some interesting news coming out of the rest of the world. As a side note, I wrote this post - twice - yesterday, only to have my internet browser crash right before posting, so if it happens again I'm just going to assume that this topic is cursed and move on with my life.

Iran is giving out visas to American journalists. Shocking! This journalist blogs about the procedure for getting a visa from the Iranian embassy in Cairo. Here is Step 5: "E-mail the press liaison. Call the press liaison and leave a long-winded message on his voicemail. You can always try to sneak in an 'asalamu alaikum' in hopes he'll recognize the super-secret code that translates, roughly, as 'I fully support your right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program.'"

The "Rose Revolution" in the former Soviet republic of Georgia is going down in flames. President Mikhail Saakashvili responded to popular unrest by declaring a state of emergency, and brutally suppressing the protesters. Along with Pakistan, Georgia is the second American ally to take an autocratic turn in recent weeks. On a purely karmic level, this does not bode well for Lebanon's pro-government leaders.

Asharq al-Awsat sent a reporter to northern Iraq to meet with members of the Kurdish nationalist PKK. The PKK adheres to a socialist ideology, and the article focuses on Kurdish women fighters discussing feminism, of all things. It's an interesting read. "I do not view my personal life separately from the lives of other Kurdish women, and I do not aspire to settle down in an isolated home and dedicate myself to my husband and children and house cleaning," said one Kurdish woman, when asked if she wanted to be a mother one day. "I want to dedicate my life and struggle to the liberation of all women like myself."

Digging In

All signs seem to be pointing to confrontation, not compromise, in recent days. Michel Aoun announced that the FPM will storm the Serail if a President is elected with an absolute majority, and Hezbollah conducted major military manuevers in the pages of Al-Akhbar. It is gratifying to see Lebanon's political class drop the charade of the past month: "Progress is being made! Of course a deal will be reached before the deadline!" Has anyone heard from Nabih Berri recently?

On the international level, the situation is equally tense. Syria is belittling the Mideast peace conference in Annapolis as a "waste." Condi Rice says the United States is opposed to compromise on the Presidential elections, and the French seem to be on board with the Bush Administration.

My guess is that you will start to see more statements like this one, where March 14 MPs reiterate their right to elect a President by absolute majority after the November 12 session. You might also see some of the March 14 leaders who previously announced their support for Presidential elections based on a 2/3 majority, such as Tripoli MP Mohammed Safadi, walking back their statements. After all, it's getting to the point where everyone has to choose their side.

Khalil Gibran, Skewered

In Lebanon, Khalil Gibran is treated as something of a national poet. But outside of this country, Gibran's reputation is more -- controversial. One English professor recently felt moved to write an entire poem, in blank verse, to express his hatred of Gibran. It's pretty hilarious. To quote the first verse:

Expansive and yet vacuous is the prose of Kahlil Gibran,
And weary grows the mind doomed to read it.
The hours of my penance lengthen,
The penance established for me by the editor of this magazine,
And those hours may be numbered as the sands of the desert.
And for each of them Kahlil Gibran has prepared
Another ornamental phrase,
Another faux-Biblical cadence,
Another affirmation proverbial in its intent
But alas! lacking the moral substance,
The peasant shrewdness, of the true proverb.

Spoiling For A Fight

Everyone knew that it was just a matter of time before South Lebanon exploded again. Now, it seems that time could be sooner than most people thought.

Let's start with the Israeli side. Nicholas Blanford speculates that the Israeli generals may believe that, with Hezbollah tied up in a fight over the Presidency with March 14, they aren't prepared for another round with the IDF. Blanford writes that the generals are suggesting, "Israel has a window of opportunity to attack Hizballah's military assets at little cost."

From the perspective of the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it seems logical that he may be eager to win any sort of victory he can get over Hezbollah. Though he somehow survived the failure of the 2006 war, his government is still defined by that fiasco. If he could win even a limited victory -- maybe not the complete disarmament of Hezbollah, but an appreciable weakening of its capabilities -- it could resurrect his political career. Think of the relationship between the Yom Kippur War and the Six Day War.

Hezbollah is taking this threat seriously. They just conducted the biggest military manuever in the organization's history. Though the papers do not describe the specifics of what occurred, "military manuevers" by a guerilla army seem to be an exercise in intimidation, rather than training. With the Presidential elections weeks away, the manuevers could also serve a domestic purpose. March 14 leaders who are contemplating electing a President with an absolute majority may think twice when they hear of Hezbollah guerillas swarming throughout South Lebanon. Hezbollah wants to show that it is ready to fight, both against Israel and a March 14-elected President.

Meanwhile, UNIFIL has a front row seat -- to watch, but nothing else. Take a look at this account of a super-spy/Dutch tourist evading UNIFIL roadblocks to reach the Blue Line. His devious tactic was to drive through the checkpoints when UNIFIL was not looking. I thought the understanding between Hezbollah and UNIFIL was that Hezbollah would not parade its arms in public, and UNIFIL would not attempt to disarm them? Not any more, I guess.

Update: This story is taking a turn for the bizarre. Both the Siniora goverment and UNIFIL are denying that anything out of the ordinary transpired in South Lebanon. You would think that the "largest scale manuevers in the history of Hezbollah," as al-Akhbar termed them, would be hard to miss.

The normally unreliable Debkafile was saying that reports of the manuevers were "largely inaccurate" before noon today. I didn't mention it at the time because, well, Debkafile is normally unreliable.

Last Tango In Paris

I always thought that it was possible for March 14 to find common ground with Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement. By this point, Aoun must realize that Amal and Hezbollah aren't going to stand up for his Presidential campaign. With his Presidential hopes dashed, March 14 might be able to find a way to drive a wedge between Aoun and the rest of the opposition. It won't be a deal where anyone gets everything they want, but it could be enough to get both sides on board. With the conclusion of two meetings between Aoun and Hariri, and a third occurring as I type, we'll soon see whether the two sides can reach a resolution.

But, of course, both sides are saying that they neglected to discuss the names of Presidential candidates. I'm starting to believe that they're just lying. What is there to agree on, other than the names of potential candidates? It's some combination of amusing and maddening to read the newspaper articles on the meetings, written by journalists who clearly have no idea what is going on, describe how the meeting "narrowed the gap separating their viewpoints" or some other sort of vague drivel.

Meanwhile: The United Nations, a little late to the game, discovers that Hezbollah is rearming. Good to see that someone over there is awake. They could have just listened to one of Hassan Nasrallah's speeches over the past year.