Lebanon: The Coup that just occurred

From the Lebanese Political Journal

Hezbollah has taken control of the media in Lebanon, and their propaganda campaign has already begun. They are currently presenting themselves as liberators of Lebanon, and allies of the Lebanese Army against a corrupt government supported by pro-government snipers and brigrands.

Hezbollah's militant takeover of Beirut and its systematic destruction of the authority of the state and freedom of the press suggests a sophisticated and planned campaign to take power. There is no hiding the violence Hezbollah used to seize Beirut and cut it off from the rest of the country. But as their media campaign is already showing, Hezbollah is employing subtle and sophisticated mechanisms to take over the rest of Lebanon. All news which could be construed as negative behaviors, such as the blatant destruction and corruption of Lebanese institutions, is hidden beneath a Hezbollah-dominated media blackout....

Targeting the Lebanese Christians

Hezbollah seems to be making a concerted effort to placate the Christian population. Ashrafieh was not attacked, and life is relatively normal in the Christian suburbs north of Beirut.

Al Jazeera is claiming that Hezbollah has made a "concession" by opening the airport road. As was told to me by a veteran Lebanese reporter, all of the journalists and news agencies reporting right now have been vetted by Hezbollah. Even if the news is true, it is written to present Hezbollah's actions as gracious.

Michel Aoun just gave an interview claiming that the crisis will be over soon. He even noted that the illegal occupation of Beirut's downtown by opposition militants will end soon. Many who watched his interview are happy to hear this news, despite it coming from a politician who appears to be Hezbollah's Christian spokesman. Once again, this sounds like propaganda that no other Lebanese faction is in a position to challenge...

..Depressing Conclusion

At the moment, it feels a bit like fall 2004 when the Syrians bullied all Lebanese factions into voting for a three year extension of Emile Lahoud's term in office. Rafiq al-Hariri resigned from office, and Lebanese parliamentarians and democratic activists kept their mouths shut while Syria appointed a government made up of its Lebanese cronies. When Lebanese politicians began to stir a bit, Druze parliamentarian Marwan Hamade was targetted for assassination, and barely survived.

According to NOW Lebanon online newspaper, pro-government websites are being attacked. So, we'll see what happens to this blog. The government's telecommunications company has probably been fully overrun by Hezbollah, and all of our calls and internet traffic could be monitored. A source in the pro-Hezbollah Syrian Social Nationalist Party claims that everything is being monitored right now. Good luck getting reliable news from Lebanon.

(Hopefully) more at NOW Lebanon

Analysis of the situation at Michael Totten's

..and Kouchner says France will not passively watch Lebanon go to war

Isn't that what we just did?

UPDATE: Jeha at Pajamas Media writes:

Second, in political terms, it is a victory that will have essentially destroyed the last shreds of Lebanon as a state. All Nasrallah’s eloquence will not hide the fact that Hezb has become no different from the Syrian army of old: an arrogant occupier with a birthright complex. The presidency will remain vacant even if the seat is filled; General Suleiman has proven himself to be unworthy of the presidency he has been longing after.

Third, in simple economic terms, Hezbo* is taking over an economy they are ill-equipped to control. When the parasite takes over the host, it kills the host and dies with it. While the thugs were taking over their positions, people were changing their Lebanese liras back to dollars.

Finally, in simple national terms, the defeat of the government would represent a defeat of the UN. With no chance of being implemented, UN resolution 1559 will wither away and Hezbo will keep their cherished weapons. But Resolution 1559 is now part of 1701, which also links the resolution to the armistice agreement with Israel and, more importantly, to Lebanon’s border demarcation. So Nasrallah will get to keep his weapons, and the Israelis will get to “redefine” the border.

As a result, we Lebanese may end up with a resistance without a people, an economy, or a land.

What are we fighting about, then?

* Jeha lives in Beirut and blogs at Jeha’s Nail. He refers to Hezbollah as “Hezbo” because he doesn’t believe in a “Party of God.”

Posted by Mary Madigan on Friday May 9, 2008 at 9:29am
double-plus-ungood (www):
It looks like Saudi Arabia is making growling noises about Hezbollah. I guess we'll see what they can do to rescue the government, which they're closely allied to.
5.9.2008 4:58pm
maryatexitzero (mail):
Oh, for pity's sake. Now people in Lebanon are going to have to spend more time hiding in the bathroom, and we're probably going to get an excuse to throw some missiles at Iran and get embroiled in a conflict that will make a further mess of the world economy.

If we wanted to deal with Iran and Syria, why didn't we just car-bomb a few of Assad's friends and weaken Iran's feeble economy? I can't believe we're still expecting the Saudis to 'help' us solve a problem they created. What could possibly go wrong...?
5.9.2008 5:12pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
I can't believe we're still expecting the Saudis to 'help' us solve a problem they created.

I don't think that anyone is "expecting" the Saudis to do anything, they're just protecting their political interests in Lebanon. The Hariri dynasty is a Saudi proxy, and the Cedar Revolution heavily backed by the Saudis. You don't think they're just going to sit back and watch Hezbollah sweep them away, do you?

Also, I'm not sure why you think that the Saudis created this problem. Wasn't that Hezbollah and therefore Iran and Syria?
5.9.2008 5:31pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
If we wanted to deal with Iran and Syria, why didn't we just car-bomb a few of Assad's friends and weaken Iran's feeble economy?

I can only guess, but I assume that most parties do not want to weaken the Syrian government in any way, as Assad is much preferable to any alternative that might overthrow him. And weaken Iran's economy how?
5.9.2008 5:35pm
maryatexitzero (mail):
I don't think that anyone is "expecting" the Saudis to do anything, they're just protecting their political interests in Lebanon.

um...are you saying this for the sake of argument, or did you miss this sentence at the end of the article?

"The US and Saudi Arabia have blamed the current escalation in Lebanon on Iran and Syria"

Saudis have been inciting the Shi'ia since forever. The Shi'ia incite back. Now the Saudis will 'help' us with the Iran problem. Of course, solving this problem will be costly..

Car bombing a few of Assad's cronies wouldn't weaken him, it would just be a request presented in a language he understands. Targeting Iran's intelligence agents would accomplish the same thing. That's the kind of dialogue that would save us a lot of time and grief.
5.9.2008 5:48pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
Saudis have been inciting the Shi'ia since forever. The Shi'ia incite back. Now the Saudis will 'help' us with the Iran problem.

Do you mean that Hezbollah has taken over large parts of Beirut because they've been incited to by the Cedar Revolution folks?

If so, no, I don't think so. I think that Hezbollah believes that they can run the country, that they want to do so, and they probably believe that they have the divine right to do so, and that this serves the political aims of Syria and Iran.

And I think it's more of an issue of the US being involved in Saudi Arabia's Iran problem than Saudi Arabia being involved in the US' Iran problem. Iran doesn't much threaten the US or US interests. Iran does, however, threaten Saudi Arabia's hegemony in the region.
5.9.2008 6:01pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
Car bombing a few of Assad's cronies wouldn't weaken him, it would just be a request presented in a language he understands.

Which cronies are you suggesting? And what is the message that's being sent?

Oh, by the way, car bombs are terrorist weapons, and killing people to send a political message is terrorism, and illegal.
5.9.2008 6:03pm
maryatexitzero (mail):
Do you mean that Hezbollah has taken over large parts of Beirut because they've been incited to by the Cedar Revolution folks?

Of course not. The Cedar Revolution folks are not dumb enough to sacrifice their interests to make the Saudis happy. We and the British are the only ones dumb enough to do that.

Oh, by the way, car bombs are terrorist weapons, and killing people to send a political message is terrorism, and illegal.

Killing innocent civilians to send a political message is terrorism, killing terror-supporting politicians in order to weaken their support for a terrorist army is counter-terrorism.

But it is illegal, which is why people linked to the govt. shouldn't do it. What a silly suggestion that was. Nevermind.
5.9.2008 6:15pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
Of course not.

Then I don't know what you meant by Saudi Arabia inciting the Shia. What did Saudi Arabia do that incited Hezbollah?

The Cedar Revolution folks are not dumb enough to sacrifice their interests to make the Saudis happy.

Do you know of the ties between the Cedar Revolution and the Saudis?
5.9.2008 6:20pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
...killing terror-supporting politicians in order to weaken their support for a terrorist army is counter-terrorism.

So which ones did you have in mind? And keep in mind that car bombs have a tendency to kill innocents bystanders as well.
5.9.2008 6:21pm
maryatexitzero (mail):
Then I don't know what you meant by Saudi Arabia inciting the Shia.

Saudis have been destroying Shi'ia holy places, shrines and gravesites within Mecca and Medina for decades. They treat the Shi'ia who live in the KSA like garbage. And that's just the public humiliations they've inflicted on Shi'ia. God knows what Saudis actions our media doesn't report. We still don't know why Libya's Kaddafi put a hit out on then-prince Abdullah.

So which ones did you have in mind?

But you said it's illegal...

It's true that bombs in general are a bad idea, because they're so inexact - the goal of any dialogue should be to send a message to specific people in power.

The effect of bombs is to terrorize civilians, whether they're targeted or not. So, no, I honestly don't think bombs of any sort are a good idea.
5.9.2008 7:11pm
double-plus-ungood (www):
Saudis have been destroying Shi'ia holy places, shrines and gravesites within Mecca and Medina for decades.

Oh, I thought you were referring to something specific more recently.
5.9.2008 7:33pm
mary (mail) (www):
No, but the Saudis really have their panties in a bunch about the situation in Lebanon. They want us to attack Iran now.

About Assad, we should deal with him in the Catholic tradition
5.10.2008 7:32am

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?