Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Hell-lelujah

Agreement, eh? No need for a lengthy analysis to note this;

The agreement does not address the “Weapons of the Resistance”.

This is no mere Second Amendment issue; in Lebanon, the weapons are THE only issue, and should be monopolized by the State in a law-abiding country. As such, the agreement signed was nothing but an act of surrender to Hezb&Co, thereby confirming their takeover of Lebanon. The valiant leaders went after the crumbs Nasrallah left them, discussing electoral arrangements, ignoring the work their commission did.

Syrian announcement that it has started talks with Israel only confirms that. They have been able to get back into Lebanese affairs by the back door, and now feel they have leverage now. So they are informing the Israelis to come back to the table on their terms. But the Americans have yet to make their real intentions known. In addition, the Israelis may prefer to pass on talks, as some are tempted to consider that such a surrender means that the Lebanese State does not exists, thereby negating any previous agreements they had signed with it...

Expect another hot July

...

11 comments:

Alphast said...

That's one of the best posts I have seen in weeks. Short an to the point. Until Hizbollah and Amal give up their weapons to the Lebanese Army, there will be no state or government in Lebanon (in the true meaning of these words). Only violent proxies of external powers. The rest is blah blah...

ghassan karam said...

Jeha,
I obviously am in total agreement with your assessment. I have already commented on your post at Yalibnan.com.
I have just finished a 6 minute Podcast on this subject that you might wish to take a listen to.

Ramblings11.mypodcast.com

Anyway I do not trust that we have accomplished anything besides buying some time at the expense of our principles. Survival at any cost is not survival at all because often the price for staying alive is just too high. If a state can survive only by becoming endentured to another state then it has to question the rationale for its own existence.

Bad Vilbel said...

Needless to say, I too am in complete agreement. I have been repeating for days now that the ONLY relevant issue is that of weapons because the rest is moot as long as one party can point a gun at the state and its people.

You pretty much nailed that in a much more eloquent way, Jeha.

My ramblings on the matter (pre Doha agreement): thebadvilbel.blogspot.com

Needless to say, your final conclusion (hot july) is EXACTLY why I've been making the rounds this morning calling people "shortsighted".

Amos said...

I don't think Israel will pass on these talks. Not after both Olmert and Moallem made public references to negotations, with Olmert calling the pursuit of peace with Syria "a national duty." Of course, the process can still fail, but something quite serious is afoot.

What the US plans to do about these developments is a real mystery. Is this part of some larger deal related to matters in Iraq? Have the Turks done all this on their own or have the Americans been apprised? Whatever the case may be, it looks like bad news for Lebanon - at least that part of it which isn't relishing rule by Hizbullah.

Son of Lebanon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Son of Lebanon said...

The Olmert government is too weak to carry out such a major decision. the only issue is the guns, but right now, it looks like the Lebanese will have to mount a second cedar revolution for that goal and it will take much patience. We have yet to see what the March 14 plan is... so far, they seem to have accepted defeat.

Shaul said...

If DOLLFUSS=HARIRI
IF SSNP=STANDARTE89 (the clandestine SS org in Vienna in 1937)
IF HEZBOLLAH=SA
IF NASRALLAH=ERNEST ROHM

THEN LEBANON=AUSTRIA
SYRIA=GERMANY
ASSAD=....HITLER!!! U can bet on it!

Anonymous said...

I am dumbfounded at the world liking this result; even Rice is happy. WTF is that all about?

Didn't aan alleged sovereign nation just get ceded to the political and military whims of an armed militia?

How is this good?

Alphast said...

It is not good. But as I posted somewhere else, there is nothing the (Western) world can do. Militarily, the USA, France and the UK are overstretched and other Western powers have not the means nor the will to do anything. And without a military, you are nothing in this world (as M14 learned at the expense of Lebanese citizens). So everybody is just happy to call this a draw or even a good thing, when it is actually a complete Hizbollah victory (otherwise, why would have they vacated central Beirut and party like crazy?).

Anonymous said...

Hazbani thinking.
If you have no bullets you will have no ballots. The rest is just an elaboration.
If and when the Durzi will give [to whom? ] the non personal weapons [remember Arslan words?] that will mean that they have aquired an aircraft carrier.
The price of weapons in Lebanon must be now one of the highest ever. Seems that the only sane alternative are one way tickets.
Now that he is out of job what is Senio. going to do?
No it is not a Hizb. victory but it is a Leb. defeat and also a defeat of all decent people in the ME, one way ticket, did I mentioned this idea alrady?.

Alphast said...

You mentioned it. But that's the way of defeated men and women. Vae victis... :-(