Monday, December 17, 2007

Tistou's Lesson

First, a disclaimer: For those amongst who can understand the actual argumentation of either “side” to this “battle of marionettes”, the prognosis is not good; stop reading, and go watch your favourite muppet dance to the tune of his foreign masters. For the others (that is, normal people), read on:

The (short) story so far:

M8 proposed General Suleiman’s as a “consensus” president, M14 initially opposed him on principle, because it would mean amending the constitution, but now that M14 agrees to amend that same constitution, M8 opposes any amendments it because it would mean that the government, which it does not recognize, will have to petition the parliament to amend the constitution, to bring in General Suleiman’s as a “consensus” president…

Confused?

Well, you should be, and this has nothing to do with the faults of this Cliff Notes version of the Lebanese situation; you’re mind is perfectly normal. It just does not make sense unless you realize that the vociferations and counter-vociferations of local and foreign pols only reflect wider power struggle in the region and beyond.

In comparison, the bombs we endured in July 2006 (along with others we left behind…) were nothing next to the mines (not only Israel’s, but mostly our own) on top of which we’ve living… But we can make funny and interesting movies when we rise above our hangups and agree to look ourselves in the face, warts and all

Not that the logic without is any better than the logic within Lebanon. The actual motivations of the “players” of this nasty game are simple. Exempli Gratia:

Within

Hezb wants a pliable president so that continue to bear arms (or arm bears), such arms that will allow to impose a president on others. Agnus dei...

Aoun will only “vote” for a president that will allow him to become president. Gluteus inflamo...

Hariri wants a president who will allow him to implement reforms and restore the economy which he insists can be implemented by the same team and political logic (and old friends) who put us in this economic mess in the first place. Nic Plenum?

Berri, Geagea, and Joumblat do not really mind the return of (any) governance to Lebanon, provided it allows them to be back to their heyday, when there was no governance over Lebanon… Vae Libanem...

No wonder whatever partisans those “leaders” of ours still have left so easily succumb to hysteria; they are at their wit’s end in trying to find justifications for the actions of their chosen leader/prophet… E ovus est...

Without

Israel would like to make peace with the Syrians by trading Syria’s return Lebanon for its continued occupation of the Golan, provided Hezb, or any other side-effects of Syrian occupation of that same Lebanon can be “neutralized” by Syria itself. Just a little bit pregnant, I guess. Sceleratus plumbeus...

The Saudis want to keep their little Riviera, and are backing up some nasty types in the face of Syria and Hezb, knowing that said types are hell-bent on destroying the den of sin that they view that Riviera to be… Goldilocks politics on display. Sceleratus dives...

Bashar… Well, I have to admit that he is the only self-consistent of the lot; he simply wants to be allowed back in Lebanon, and is willing, and (oh so) able to leverage the contradictions of those “leaders” of ours, and the confusions of the French and Americans…Sceleratus directus...

Still Confused?

Well, you shouldn’t be anymore, now that you know that Syria is the only one of this sorry bunch who knows what it wants. The rest are content with jaw-jaw rather than deeds.

Lebanon crystallizes in the extreme the way the world is (mis)managed. An example of this is found in Maurice Druon’s only children book, “Tistou Les Pouces Verts”:

-Tistou : pourquoi les Vazys et les Vatens veulent se faire la guerre?

-Mr Trounadisse : c'est pour le désert.

-Pourquoi, ils veulent du sable?

-Non, ils veulent ce qu'il y a en-dessous.

-Qu'est-ce qu'il y a en-dessous?

-Il y a du pétrole.

-Et à quoi ça sert du pétrole?

-ça sert à se faire la guerre.

-Donc les Vazys et les Vatens veulent se faire la guerre pour du pétrole qui sert à se faire la guerre... c'est idiot !

Q.E.D.



3 comments:

Lalebanessa said...

jeha, are you still watching the news? you must be the only one left, why don't you join the rest of us and just tune them out? It's much more sane over here in the complete denial zone.

ali bm said...

nice one jeha and i agree with it except for the part about syria, i think syria wants to return to lebanon and to get the golan heights as hezbollah is not the only proxy they have, don't forget hamas and the other palestinian factions and the syrian interference in iraq.

Jeha said...

Signioria Lebanessa,

Maybe this is all part of dealing with exposure to the news pollution that oozes in. Whenever I go, people are debating, arguing, or fighting over those "grand" issues. And it does not help that I have a rather diverse group of friends that mix like oil and water... Maybe I should be hanging out with more normal people.

Ali,

I agree with you generally, except on one key factor; I think that the mindset of the current regime in place in Syria is not fundamentally better than our current crop of "leaders"; they are all sectarian short-termists, with no long term vision. This fact is proven by the "traction" that M8 & Co find among a significant portion of the population, and it may even have its equivalent in Sryia, were it not for the strong suppression of dissent there.

Initially, they all appeared content to share more than 3 Billion USD/Year in rackets, and t it seems that only when that golden goose was milked out that they started diverging before split up. Now, the Syrians are making signs of ever greater compromise on the Golan. Their acceptance of a "peace park" goes beyond Israeli demands of "mutual arrangements". Note that this park would include part of Shebaa an Ghajar, much to the delight of short-term minded among Israeli Biskhonim, but at the expense of Jordan (trigger effects are not factored in by short-termists...)

I think a Golan without water is not worth having, unless one factors in a potential return of Syria to Lebanon. Incidentally, this would be part of "security cooperation" included in the proposed peace agreements touted in January 2007, and described in Ha'aretz, Al-Nahar, and the Orient... But few local pols listened; they're too busy with grand constitutional issues, I guess.