LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
October 25/09

Bible Reading of the day
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 13:1-9. At that time some people who were present there told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. He said to them in reply, "Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them --do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!"
And he told them this parable: "There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener, 'For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none. (So) cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?' He said to him in reply, 'Sir, leave it for this year also, and I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it; it may bear fruit in the future. If not you can cut it down.'"

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Who really won the elections, Does it even matter/By: Nicholas Lowry/Lebanon Now/October 24/09
Interview with to Lebanon's First MP Khaled Zahraman/Lebanon Now/October 24/09
Does Iran's rigid stance invite war?/Daily Star/October 24/09
Israel Ever-Present at US-Iranian Negotiations/Raghida Dergham/October 24/09
Lebanon's political chaos aggravated/By Jumana Al Tamimi/October 24/09
Hezbollah Rules Lebanon/By Ghassan Karam/October 24/09
MP. Sleiman Franjieh's New Stance/Lebanon Now/October 24/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for October 24/09
Sfeir: To overcome obstacles facing the Lebanese/Future News
Geagea: They want to show the system is incapable/Future News
Sami Gemayel: We refuse to sign any Ministerial Statement that legitimizes Hezbollah’s arms/Now Lebanon
Geagea: Those Obstructing Cabinet Don't Believe in Taef Accord /Naharnet
Obama Looks Forward to Working with a Lebanese Cabinet that Promotes Regional Stability /Naharnet
Another Round of Hariri-Aoun Talks Soon as FPM Leader Demands Fair Alternatives /Naharnet
Berri Working on Ending Political Vacuum Next Week /Naharnet
Assad Reiterates Support for Unity Cabinet as Damascus Advises Suleiman to Speed up Formation /Naharnet
Report: STL Began Effecting Hizbullah-Syria Ties /Naharnet
Kouchner: There is Urgency to Form a Cabinet because Regional Situation is Not Good /Naharnet
Washington Grants Military Equipment to Lebanese Army/Naharnet
Opposition Holds Geagea Responsible for Provoking Aoun /Naharnet
4 Arrested over Jounieh's Assault on Bachir Moussa /Naharnet
Sison Visits UNIFIL Headquarters in Naquora /Naharnet
UNIFIL Celebrates U.N. Day, Honors Long-serving Lebanese Staff Members /Naharnet
Trial of Hizbullah Cell Members Resumes Saturday /Naharnet
Overnight explosions rock town of Majdal Anjar/Daily Star
EDL warns of longer rationing if violations persist/Daily Star
ISF to bolster measures to thwart car theft/Daily Star
Siniora orders Nahr al-Bared rebuild to continue/Daily Star
Kouchner: Only Lebanon to blame for cabinet delay/Daily Star
Middle East Airlines to resume direct flights to Baghdad end of month/Daily Star
Zaiter urges Arab states to increase drug production/Daily Star
ICA: Emerging markets will lead global economy in coming years/Daily Star
Geographic Information System will help modernize Lebanon's economy/Daily Star
Beirut's Shiite bastion revives after 2006 war/Daily Star

Obama Looks Forward to Working with a Lebanese Cabinet that Promotes Regional Stability
Naharnet/U.S. President Barack Obama expressed hope on Friday that Lebanon's factions would finally form a new cabinet as he marked the 26th anniversary of what he called the "senseless" Beirut bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks. "We remember today the 241 American Marines, soldiers, and sailors who lost their lives 26 years ago as the result of a horrific terrorist attack that destroyed the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon," Obama said. "The murder of our soldiers, sailors, and Marines on this day on 1983 remains a senseless tragedy," Obama said in a statement. While remembering the victims of the bombing, their families and all U.S. service personnel abroad, Obama also looked to the future in Lebanon, where a political crisis has prevented cabinet formation since the parliamentary elections in June. "In remembering this terrible day of loss, we are at the same time hopeful that a new government in Lebanon will soon be formed," Obama said. "We look forward to working with a Lebanese government that works actively to promote stability in the region and prosperity for its people." The U.S. State Department also issued a statement on the anniversary of the attack on the Marine barracks. "The Marine barracks memorial on the grounds of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut reads, 'They came in peace.' So too have the troops of the current U.N. peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon come in peace," the statement said. "On this somber occasion, the United States also commends the brave men and women of that mission and of all international peacekeeping missions who work to protect civilians and prevent the outbreak of conflict," it added.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 08:06

Sami Gemayel: We refuse to sign any Ministerial Statement that legitimizes Hezbollah’s arms
Naharnet/October 24, 2009 /During the annual dinner held on Friday in honor of the Kataeb Party student body, Kataeb Party bloc MP Sami Gemayel said that “the party refuses to sign any Ministerial Statement that legitimizes or accepts Hezbollah’s illegitimate arms.” “We will no longer accept any Lebanese to process rights that we lack,” said Gemayel, adding, “We will not attack anyone. However, we will defend ourselves, and we will support the security forces and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in performing their duties and in asserting their authority in Lebanon.”-NOW Lebanon

Sfeir: To overcome obstacles facing the Lebanese
Date: October 24th, 2009
Source: NNA
Maronite Patriarch Mar Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir said Friday the difficult situation in Lebanon necessitates the formation of a national unity government, and pressures politicians to help the citizens overcome all obstacles at all levels. Sfeir received Internal Security Chief, General Ashraf Rifi who told reporters after the meeting that his visit was to brief Patriarch over the actual security situation in the country, which is so far perfect, the National News Agency quoted General Rifi as saying. Rifi revealed that a new plan is to be arranged between the ministry of interior and Lebanese Intelligence to escort car thefts and prevent its recurrence. Afterwards, Patriarch received Lebanon First bloc Deputy Robert Ghanem, who called on politicians to prioritize the high national interest above the narrow personal ones in order to serve the public welfare of the country. Ghanem hoped a quick formation of the cabinet. Otherwise, added Ghanem, it would be better for Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Lebanese President Michel Sleiman to lineup a national unity government, “and those who reject the bid would be disrupting the cabinet formation and thus paralyzing the country,” Ghanem argued. Head of the Patriarchal Committee for religious affairs, Bishop Boutros Gemayel visited Sfeir during which he briefed him of the committee's works. Patriarch Sfeir received also today former head of Maronite League Hareth Chehab and Maronite Bishop Guy Njeim. Later in the day, Patriarch received Jordan ambassador to Lebanon and surveyed with him bilateral relations between Lebanon and Jordan.

Geagea: They want to show the system is incapable
Date: October 24th, 2009/Source: NNA
Lebanese Forces Party (LF) leader Samir Geagea said that the minority wants a consensual government according to its understanding otherwise it won’t allow the cabinet birth, the State-run National News Agency reported Saturday. During the annual dinner organized by the businessmen of the LF party, Geagea noted that the winning team in the June 7 parliamentary elections cannot form the government on its own, “in order to show the inability of the system” and the 1989 Taëf peace agreement that ended 1975-1990 Lebanese civil war.
Geagea, a March 14 coalition leader, added that a diversion was created in the previous four months of the cabinet composition by giving the impression that the effective problem is over ministerial portfolios and names, and noted that “the ongoing crisis is over two opposing projects to Lebanon.” The LF leader underlined that the minority forgot about its previous demands in the past four years for early parliamentary elections which winner would govern, when the March 14 coalition achieved a victory.

Report: STL Began Effecting Hizbullah-Syria Ties
Naharnet/Ties between Syria and its Lebanese ally Hizbullah were shaken following a report in May by German newspaper Der Spiegel which implicated the Shiite group in the killing of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri, a well-informed source told pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. The source added in remarks published Saturday that the issue of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon has affected Syria-Hizbullah relations. STL General Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare will visit Paris on November 4 to meet with French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and presidency officials, according to the source. He said Paris' openness to Syria is not linked to the issue of the tribunal, adding that France is fully committed to the STL and Bellemare's mission continues as a result of funding by countries such as France, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. About Kouchner's decision not to visit Syria following a trip to Lebanon, the source said the French FM cancelled his visit to express condemnation about the arrest of Syrian rights activist Haitham al-Maleh and a decision by Damascus authorities to postpone the signing of the partnership with the EU for economic reasons. Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 23:35

Geagea: Those Obstructing Cabinet Don't Believe in Taef Accord
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea has accused Lebanese parties that don't believe in the Taef agreement of putting obstacles in the path of government formation.
"Those who are most causing problems and obstructing the cabinet lineup are the parties that don't believe in the structure of the Lebanese system which is based on the Taef accord," Geagea said Friday night during a dinner hosted by LF businessmen. "These sides seek to depict the Lebanese as incapable of forming the government to put doubts on the system," the LF leader said. "The other team wants a consensus cabinet based on its own concept or else it won't let the government to be formed.""We will not accept making steps that would take Lebanon away from the project that we are working for," he added. Geagea reiterated that those who don't accept the PM-designate's cabinet lineup should join the opposition rather than putting obstacles to government formation, a clear reference to Free Patriotic Movement leader Gen. Michel Aoun. The opposition, according to Geagea, wants a Lebanon that has neither borders nor a strategy. Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 13:22

Another Round of Hariri-Aoun Talks Soon as FPM Leader Demands Fair Alternatives
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun has confirmed that he would hold another meeting with PM-designate Saad Hariri as part of consultations aimed at breaking the cabinet deadlock.As Safir daily also said Saturday that Hariri's advisor Nader Hariri visited Rabiyeh the day before and agreed with Aoun that another round of consultations would be held between the PM-designate and the FPM leader. Sources following up the contacts between the two sides told the newspaper that the Hariri-Aoun meeting could be held on Saturday.
Meanwhile, Aoun told Iran's Press TV on Friday that he had exchanged viewpoints with Hariri during previous meetings but no agreement was reached on names or portfolios.
"If they (the majority) want a solution they should give us fair alternatives. If we want to be fair we (Change and Reform bloc) should get six ministries. But we could make a concession by giving up one seat but not more," the MP said. Asked about his condition for dropping demands to keep the Telecommunications Ministry with his bloc, Aoun said: "I have to know the reasons in order to give it up. If the reasons are worth it then I could drop it. But I won't do it without valid reasons." Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 09:17

Berri Working on Ending Political Vacuum Next Week
Naharnet/Speaker Nabih Berri has reportedly said that he has "ideas" aimed at breaking the deadlock on the cabinet crisis and considered the last week of October a deadline for finding a solution. Berri's visitors told As Safir daily that the speaker would propose his ideas to all Lebanese parties in coordination with the president and the premier-designate.
He reportedly said he doesn't mind dropping a cabinet seat on condition that the concept of rotating ministries includes all sides without exception. "If they want the foreign ministry, I don't mind that a minister from the Liberation bloc heads the finance ministry," the speaker said. Berri's sources told As Safir that the speaker could hold a meeting with PM-designate Saad Hariri anytime soon. The newspaper added that Berri telephoned President Michel Suleiman and informed him that "intervention" is necessary to break the cabinet formation deadlock.According to Berri's sources, the speaker "stressed to the president the need to put an end to the (political) vacuum and consider next week the deadline for finding a solution.""Things have become unbearable and we shouldn't let people get used to the vacuum," Berri told Suleiman, according to the sources. Asked by As Safir what steps he would take to find a solution and if he would propose an initiative, Berri said: "We have to get over with this. The country cannot bear" the situation anymore. Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 08:39

Assad Reiterates Support for Unity Cabinet as Damascus Advises Suleiman to Speed up Formation
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman has held a telephone conversation with his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad, who according to An Nahar daily, reiterated his support for the formation of the Lebanese cabinet. An Nahar said Assad also stressed to Suleiman that Syria backed the decisions reached during the Damascus-Riyadh summit earlier this month and "expressed readiness to offer all what the Lebanese president asks for." Al-Liwaa daily said Suleiman has received an advice from Syria to seek with Hariri to form a cabinet as soon as possible. That's why the president prefers that the PM-designate would carry with him a government lineup the next time he visits Baabda. A source told Future News TV that Hariri postponed his visit to Baabda pending developments on the contacts that he's going to make to break the cabinet impasse. Meanwhile, well-informed sources told As Safir daily that contacts have been made between Syria and Saudi Arabia and between each country and its allies in Lebanon on the government crisis. The sources said that contacts were not broken since the summit between Saudi King Abdullah and Assad earlier this month. On the contrary, the two sides are cooperating on the Lebanese issue amid vows to support efforts to form a national unity cabinet as soon as possible. Beirut, 24 Oct 09, 09:50

Kouchner: There is Urgency to Form a Cabinet because Regional Situation is Not Good
Naharnet/French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner described the regional situation as "not good" on Friday saying it was urgent to form a government in Lebanon to confront existing challenges. "It is very urgent for the government to be formed because the regional situation is not good" and the peace process is not moving forward, Kouchner said following talks with President Michel Suleiman at Baabda palace. "I heard from President Michel Suleiman that the cabinet would be formed soon based on the 15-10-5 formula," he said.
Lebanon is in need of a government in which all sects are represented, Kouchner told reporters.He also offered Lebanon assistance to form the cabinet. Kouchner stressed, however, that the Lebanese can't rely solely on France to form a government. "It is not up to France to form your government and we have not come to give lessons, but we are worried.
"You cannot continue this way. You are promoting all the most dangerous trends in the region ... At stake are your security and the unity and freedom of Lebanon," he said.
"I hope things would move forward," Kouchner said after the 45-minute talks with Suleiman, adding there were internal as well as foreign reasons preventing cabinet formation. Foreign countries should "abide by their commitments," he stressed.
On regional contacts, Kouchner described the meeting between Saudi King Abdullah and Syrian President Bashar Assad earlier this month as "important." But said: "We can't expect immediate results.""Have you ever seen a Lebanese government formed quickly? Of course not," Kouchner added.
Earlier Friday, the French foreign minister held separate talks with his Lebanese counterpart Fawzi Salloukh and Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat.
From Baabda, Kouchner headed to Ain el-Tineh for talks with Speaker Nabih Berri and later met with Caretaker PM Fouad Saniora at the Grand Serail.
Following talks with PM-designate Saad Hariri at Center House at noon Friday, Kouchner said: "The international community should witness the birth of a new stable government in a stable and friendly Lebanon." Asked if Syria has abided by its commitments on Lebanon, Kouchner said: "Syria didn't influence the formation of the cabinet."At a press conference held in BIEL Friday evening, Kouchner said that a solid government has to be formed in Lebanon, however, he said that he did not know the exact date. Kouchner also told the reporters at the press conference that he has touched that PM-designate Saad Hariri and FPM leader MP Michel Aoun were ready to form the cabinet. The French FM said that he does not see that the latest optimism means that all things regarding cabinet formation were solved. Beirut, 23 Oct 09, 12:23

Washington Grants Military Equipment to Lebanese Army
Naharnet/The United States Embassy announced in a press release on Friday that U.S. granted a big shipment of equipment to the Lebanese Army, especially for the marine forces which received 8 rubber zodiacs (Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats) that suit especially the Coast Guard patrols and anti-confiscation operations. U.S. also presented 9 military ambulances of Hemi type and 60 Hemi tactical military vehicles. The Lebanese Army was also granted a firefighting specialized vehicle that serves in fighting any fire that erupts in military bases.
The statement of the U.S. Embassy noted that the general aim of the U.S. military aid to Lebanon is to enforce the Lebanese Army and enhance its capabilities in defending Lebanon's borders and sovereignty. Beirut, 23 Oct 09, 17:57

4 Arrested over Jounieh's Assault on Bachir Moussa
Naharnet/The Internal Security Forces arrested on Friday four persons who had assaulted Bachir Moussa last Saturday in Jounieh. The Public Relations Division of the Internal Security Forces – Directorate General issued the following statement: "As a result of intense investigations, and upon the signal of specialized judiciary, and in Ain al-Mreisseh area, a force consisted of Jounieh's police, in cooperation with the investigation department in Beirut's police managed to arrest each of: The Lebanese nationals Q.D. (born 1986), M.K. (born 1972), A.M. (born 1986), and the Palestinian M.K. (born 1975), after they all, on October 18 2009, stabbed with knives the citizen B.M. (born 1982) at a nightclub in Jounieh during a personal fighting and escaped afterwards towards unidentified whereabouts." Beirut, 23 Oct 09, 18:20

Hezbollah Rules Lebanon.
Published: Saturday, 24 October, 2009
http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2009/10/hezbollah_rules.php
By Ghassan Karam
Special to Ya Libnan
Developments in all areas take place when either one or both of the parties benefit. No one will willingly agree to an exchange or an
outcome that will be harmful to their interests, given that the actors are rational. So it always makes sense to suggest that if an agreement between the parties cannot be arrived at then the stalemate is also an outcome that benefits one of the parties to that particular transaction.
Premier designate Sa’ad Hariri has been attempting to form a cabinet in Lebanon for over four months but all his efforts have been to no avail thus far. It is rather obvious that this elongated period of a political deadlock is not helpful to his image, reputation nor is it helpful for his majority coalition, March 14, which is becoming increasingly portrayed as “the gang that couldn’t shoot straight”. Mr. Hariri and his allies were ecstatic when their alliance managed to check the ambitions of the FPM candidates who managed nonetheless to win a large number of parliamentary seats. The other two major allies in the opposition camp, Amal and Hezbollah, captured all the seats that they were expected to win. Yet the opposition as a group fell short of capturing the majority of seats in the chamber of deputies. Normally that would have been the end of the story. The winners would have been called upon to form a cabinet and to govern provided that their proposed cabinet has enough support.
But that would have been too easy for the Lebanese sectarian system. Michel Aoun , the squeaky wheel of Lebanese politics, keeps coming up with fresh demands as to assure that the efforts to form a cabinet of “national unity” are frustrated. General Aoun and his FPM party are the most direct and clear obstacle that has prevented the formation of a “national Unity” cabinet. But don’t let that fool you into believing that Mr. Aoun is a king maker. His demands might be genuinely those of his party but that would not be enough to prevent cabinet formation in the face of considerable domestic and international pressure to do so unless he had the support of Hezbollah.
Hezbollah have been the real “power behind the thrown” in Lebanese politics for almost the past four years. Hezbollah have the largest militia, albeit illegal, and the most sophisticated cache of weapons that is also illegal. But the issue of illegality is not an issue at all in a dysfunctional state where the legitimate armed forces of the state are outgunned by the foreign trained and foreign funded illegal militia. Michel Aoun and all his shenanigans would not amount to a “hill of beans” without the blessings of the real rulers of Lebanon; Hezbollah. A strong and stable central government is not a development that Hezbollah favours. Their activities and their state within a state prefer the current situation of paralysis of the central government. The FPM is nothing but a foil for the real beneficiaries of an ineffective and powerless state. Hezbollah has created a unique environment that allows it to rule without being held responsible and that has “legitimized” its outlaw status.
A Podcast of the above has been posted to: ramblings11.blogspot.com
Comments: wp.karam@gmail.com

Anniversary of Attack on U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon
US Department of State/Office of the Spokesman/Washington, DC
October 23, 2009/Today marks the 26th anniversary of the October 23, 1983 bombing of the United States Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. The United States honors the sacrifices of the 241 American servicemen who lost their lives that day in service of their country while protecting the stability of Lebanon. The Marine barracks memorial on the grounds of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut reads, “They came in peace.” So too have the troops of the current UN peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon come in peace. On this somber occasion, the United States also commends the brave men and women of that mission and of all international peacekeeping missions who work to protect civilians and prevent the outbreak of conflict.

Beirut bombing victims remembered
October 23, 2009
By Hope Hodge
Freedom ENC
Twenty-six years after a bombing in Lebanon stunned Jacksonville, Camp Lejeune and surrounding communities, veterans and their families still remember with sadness but are forging healing bonds. On Friday morning, the city and Camp Lejeune marked the anniversary of the 1983 suicide bombing that took the lives of 241 Marines, sailors and soldiers, most of whom were from the First Battalion, Eighth Marines, based at Jacksonville’s Camp Geiger. The service at the Beirut Memorial drew hundreds to the granite wall carrying a simple, eloquent inscription: “They Came in Peace.” Jacksonville Mayor Sammy Phillips recalled the grief stricken moments the community shared after hearing news of the bombings. But he also spoke of how they united to endure the coming days. “Jacksonville has never been the same since Beirut,” he said. “No single event has brought the military and civilian leaders so close together.”
Col. Richard Flatau Jr., commanding officer of Camp Lejeune, laid a wreath at the site of the memorial and gave a brief address. He commended the community on helping each other in shared sorrow and how they work to keep alive the memory of those who died. Maj. Gen. Paul Lefebvre, deputy commanding general of the II Marine Expeditionary Force, said the day was very personal to him as then-commanding officer of Third Battalion, Eighth Marines.
“Eighth Marines is my home,” he said. Lefebvre described the tragic events of Oct. 23, 1983, reminding all that those who were killed were on a peacekeeping mission. Although the history of the Beirut bombing is not well-known on the national level, Lefebvre noted its global impact, calling the attack “the beginning of what is now called the war on terror.”
The day began a life journey for another in the audience. Edward Northup Gadsby III was a resident of Midway Park, N.J., when he heard news of the Beirut attack. The next day, he reported to his local recruiting office to enlist in the Marines, requesting a position as a machine gunner. When he left the Marines, he remained in Jacksonville, raising his family here.
Each year, he said, he takes his family to the memorial service to remember, a way of ensuring “that all of our children have a working understanding of the unbelievable sacrifices made by our service men and women.”Two and a half decades later, many who found strength in each other during the wake of tragedy remain close. Tom Rutter, who was a Marine with 1/8 in Beirut at the time of the bombing, traveled from Essex, Md., for the service, as he has for six years.
“I was about half a mile away when it happened,” he said. A member of the scout sniper platoon, he remembers spending half a day on site, “helping with recovering the bodies, identifying casualties.” Though Rutter found it difficult to come to the memorial event for many years because of the memories, he now keeps in touch with several veterans by e-mail.
“We’re all brothers,” he said. “Not a day goes by that I don’t think about it.” Near the close of the ceremony, Eric Horner, a Nashville-based Christian musician whose wife, Debby, is one of the widows of Beirut, performed a song he had written for last year’s 25th anniversary service. “They were brothers, they were soldiers, they were sailors and Marines,” he sang. “They came in peace; now they walk on peaceful shores.”

Israel Ever-Present at US-Iranian Negotiations
http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/68960
Fri, 23 October 2009
Raghida Dergham'
New York - The strategy of the two parallel tracks, based on incentives and threats, which has been adopted by the Barack Obama Administration is raising debate and discussion, as well as finding those who would challenge it, those who believe in its roots, those who fear for it and those who are wary of it falling like a gift onto the lap of the seasoned experts of procrastination, obstruction and maneuvers. This strategy, dubbed the dual strategy, represents the cornerstone of the Obama Administration’s general foreign policy – clearly appearing in the way it is dealing with Iran, Sudan, Palestine, Israel and Afghanistan. It is a strategy that raises debate and anger among those who want the principle of justice and accountability to stand above all considerations, and especially those who had believed that there would be no compromising on justice in Darfur when President Barack Obama and his team arrived at the White House. Indeed, these people are disappointed by the dual strategy towards Sudan, which was revealed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice this week, and in which they find a reward in advance for obstinacy. Others find ethical duality in the way the Obama Administration is handling the Goldstone Report, as the Administration immediately fled justice when it came close to reaching Israel. Yet there are also those who see in the dual strategy towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, based on the US President’s personal pledge of insisting on finding a just solution, which hints to the possibility of removing the cover of automatic absolution from Israel. These people are waging a two-sided campaign against the Obama Administration, one opposing any strategy that tests the US-Israeli relationship in any way, and the other regarding the new US policy towards Iran, because it is seen as a dangerous risk, especially in its nuclear dimension. Nevertheless, there are those who adopt the opposite opinion towards the dual strategy when it comes to Iran, and they in turn are divided into numerous points of view. Russia for instance wants to encourage US rapprochement with Iran, but opposes adopting parallel tracks, one of them enticing and the other threatening with sanctions, as it sees no need for the stick since Iran is accepting the carrot. Others applaud the fact that the new US policy involves taking measures to prepare for sanctions, in parallel with constructive dialogue and engagement, and consider it wise. There are also those who consider the Barack Obama Administration to be naïve in offering various concessions in advance and without guarantees. Finally, there are those who wager on the efficacy of the new method and consider that there is no other option anyway during this phase where America’s affairs are being reorganized at the internal, foreign, political, military and economic levels equally.
Iran has started to delve deeper and to interact with this phase. What Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon, as well as Syria and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, should do is rationally analyze Iran’s strategy in response to that of the US and monitor its developments. Yet the national interest of any of these countries or parties lies not only in analyzing and discussing the strategies of others, but rather in positioning themselves as part of such strategies based on their own strategy, one that would be intelligent, practical, far-sighted and good at moving on more than one track towards an unknown fate or tunnel. Here are a few examples:
The Islamic Republic of Iran, with its customary worldly wisdom and skill, has ignored the “stick” of sanctions which the Obama Administration is working on formulating with international partners, and has resolved to make use of the “carrot” of dialogue to make of itself an authority and a partner at the same time.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki declaring this week that “Russia and America were enough” for the task of enriching Iranian uranium abroad and that Iran refuses to have France participate in talks provides far-reaching indications. Officially, what Mottaki said is that “France is not a party that can be trusted to supply Iran with fuel, in view of its inability to fulfill its commitments in the past”, pointing to Paris’s refusal to supply Tehran with nuclear fuel despite the fact that Iran has owned 10 percent of French uranium enriching company Eurodif since the days of the Shah.
The important political indication is represented by Iran’s desire to be a regional superpower that only sits down with the United States and Russia under the sponsorship of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to reach an understanding over the steps of enrichment and beyond. Thus Tehran would have succeeded at keeping the nuclear issue in Vienna, where it has always wanted it to be, and under US-Russian-Iranian care, as this would bring it enormous political benefits, especially as it comes in the wake of an Administration that described Iran as part of the “Axis of Evil”.
By this Tehran is saying: I am the proper destination; we understand the language of superpowers and are among the superpowers – at least at the regional level. It is noteworthy that Syria spoke in the same tone and language when it tried to exclude Lebanon from the discussion between Saudi Arabia and Syria, on the basis that the KSA and Syria speak the language of great powers in the region; both of them are great, and there is no need to “cram” a small issue or country like Lebanon into the discussions of great ones. But we will speak of this later in this article.
Noteworthy in the discussion between the US and Iran is the fact that Tehran wants to “warm up” bilateral relations with gradual steps, whereas Washington wants to “engage” with the aim of convincing Iran with an adequate explanation that would help it think of “calculating” details and complementarity in a different way. Indeed, the Obama Administration has laid an important foundation in its policy towards Iran, one based on ending the policy of “either or”.
In other words, Washington wants to work with other countries to prepare tough sanctions to be imposed on Iran, in parallel with working with Iran in the framework of dialogue and negotiations. Russia does not approve of such a dual strategy and is opposed to applying this policy to Iran, as it considers that it implies an insult in advance and that there is no need for threats in the age of dialogue and cooperation.
The Obama Administration may wish to reach a phase of détente with Iran, but it certainly does not behave as if it has entered into a relationship of détente with it. The nuclear issue is central of course, but they both want to discuss other issues at the dialogue table. The difference is that Tehran wants to address the various issues that make it a partner as the main country in the Middle East, like Israel or Turkey. The Obama Administration, on the other hand, wants to discuss issues that are broader than the nuclear issue, but has not defined or even addressed them yet. This goes back to either falling short due to lack of awareness or knowledge, or to fears of upsetting Iran in the early stages of dialogue.
Iraq is an important part of the discussion between the US and Iran. There may be an implicit agreement there, as some say, and there may be no need to wait for Iraq to be addressed officially at the dialogue table.
Israel may very well be ever-present in US-Iranian bilateral talks regarding the nuclear issue, especially as it threatens not to allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons, while Tehran responds by protesting the fact that Israel is not being punished for possessing unlawful nuclear weapons.
What is absent, however, and needs to be crammed into US-Iranian talks is the peace process to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, to which the US President pledged to give priority, considering that the ongoing conflict threatens the national interest of the US. Indeed, what is required should not necessarily be Iran’s blessing of the peace process, but rather an American insistence on Iran ceasing to obstruct the peace process by using the suffering of the Palestinian to its own ends.
There is a clear US stance on the side of moderation and a clear message to the ranks of Palestinian moderation, one which President Barack Obama made sure to convey through his National Security Advisor James Jones to the American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), headed by Dr. Ziad Asali, at the yearly dinner that gathered senior American and Arab-American officials. It is the message of building the Palestinian state and its institutions under the leadership of the Palestinian Authority to end the occupation through negotiations. Hamas, which Iran adopts supporting through various means, does not want negotiations as a means to end the occupation and build the state, and there are among its ranks today those who speak of reviving armed struggle to topple the Palestinian Authority, knowing that the capabilities of armed resistance are limited. Thus US-Iranian talks deserve for the Obama Administration to take the initiative of addressing the Palestinian issue there.
The Obama Administration should also take the initiative of addressing the issue of Lebanon with Iran and with Syria, and should insist upon it with both of them, no matter how much they want to keep it away from the negotiations table. The Obama Administration insists that it has not and will not strike deals with Iran or Syria at the expense of Lebanon, as it insists that it is not in its interest to improve relations with Syria by undermining the interests of a country which it defends, i.e. Lebanon. This entails an invalidation that contradicts what the Obama Administration wants, yet it is not enough, especially that the prevailing impression – or that which some are trying to promote – is that the US does not care about Lebanon.
Certainly there is bias in many US government and media sectors, particularly when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli issue, and Israel is automatically protected from being held accountable and from being criticized, it is spared from punishment, and discussion into it is smothered and repressed. Thus when Israeli journalist Amira Hass spoke in a tone of strong criticism and clear condemnation of Israeli policy before a gathering of American journalists at the International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF) lunch at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel in New York, she both amazed and shocked those present. Indeed, her words coincided with attempts to contain discussion into the Goldstone Report, which stated that Israel and Hamas had both committed war crimes in Gaza, and possibly crimes against humanity.
The Obama Administration does not want to corner Israel, especially as the latter feels that it no longer enjoys absolute US protection. It considers that Goldstone did not resolve to issue a report that would cripple the peace process. It also considers that it is necessary not to submit to attempts by Israel, Hamas and others to undermine Palestinian partnership in negotiations through the campaign against President Mahmoud Abbas.

Lebanon's political chaos aggravated
Aoun's demands for six portfolios send Cabinet formation talks back to square one
http://gulfnews.com/news/region/lebanon/lebanon-s-political-chaos-aggravated-1.518081

By Jumana Al Tamimi, Associate Editor
Published: 00:00 October 23, 2009
Dubai: Efforts to form a new cabinet in Lebanon suffered what many politicians in Beirut described on Thursday as a "serious" setback as the demands of the Christian leader Michel Aoun saw government deliberations being sent back to square one.
"It seems there is no government soon. Nothing at all is clear now," Lebanese columnist Hazem Sagyieh said.
"Apparently they [internal and regional parties] are leaning towards leaving Aoun putting hurdles in the way of forming a government," Sagyieh told Gulf News.
Aoun, head of the Free Patriotic Movement (FMP) demanded Wednesday evening, in what some Lebanese media reports described as a defiant tone, that his party be granted six portfolios and be allowed to maintain the five ministries — including the Telecommunications Ministry, being handled by his Reform and Change bloc in the current caretaker cabinet.
Other ministries include energy, social affairs and agriculture. However, MPs from the FPM denied the implication that they are behind the making up of an internal crisis or prolonging it.
Crisis
"The crisis exists, and it wasn't us who created it," Ziad Aswad, a lawyer and MP for Aoun's bloc, one of the major parties in the March 8 bloc, or the opposition.
"The decision to form the cabinet is not in our hands, so we can't manoeuvre or show stubbornness. The decision is in the hands of the majority," he told Gulf News in reference to the March 14 bloc, which is headed by prime minister designate Sa'ad Hariri, and has the majority of seats in the 128-member parliament.
"We have rights and we are not willing to make concessions on these rights under any circumstances," Aswad said, pointing out that the FMP was not the party that spread media speculation in the past few days and raised hopes of an imminent formation of a cabinet when Aoun's bloc "was not in the picture."
Aoun was also quoted as stressing that none of the proposals he discussed with Hariri were taken into consideration as ministries being handled by the FPM were the only ones being subject, in any proposition, to the principle of rotating portfolios, the Daily Star reported.
Aoun demanded earlier his party be assigned a sovereign portfolio if he is to relinquish his request for the Telecommunications Ministry. But parliamentary majority officials stressed that portfolios were not subject to the principle of rotation among parties, it added.
The four sovereign portfolios include the Finance Ministry (currently handled by the Future Movement), the Defence and Interior ministries, which are part of the president's share, and the Foreign Ministry allotted to the Amal Movement, headed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri.
MPs from the Future Movement, headed by Hariri, preferred not to comment on Aoun's demands.
"We have nothing to say [for the time being]," MP Ammar Houri told Gulf News. "We are studying carefully what Michel Aoun said."
As efforts to form a new cabinet in Lebanon are getting more complicated, analysts believe Hariri has three options at present: "either to ask for an extension to his consultations, step down or declare a political crisis in the country," Sagyieh said.

Talking to Lebanon First MP Khaled Zahraman
Lebanon Now
Manal Sarrouf , October 24, 2009
Lebanon First bloc MP Khaled Zahraman talks to NOW about the cabinet formation, the Telecom Ministry and what the future holds for Lebanon.
Why is Lebanon still without a cabinet, despite high hopes that prevailed following the Saudi-Syrian summit?
Zahraman: Until Wednesday noon, the atmosphere was very positive, and all parties were saying that the cabinet will most likely be formed within two weeks. However, [Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel] Aoun surprised us all on Wednesday with his fiery speech, which turned the tables around. We do not know if [the opposition] can fix the situation anymore. It seems Aoun was irritated by the meeting held between the Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and [Lebanese Forces leader Samir] Geagea, and by Hariri’s circle leaking some of the results of the cabinet deliberations. Aoun is accusing Hariri of trying to instigate a conflict between him and the opposition by these leaks. Undoubtedly, the basic problem is Hezbollah’s insistence on keeping the Telecom Ministry [within the opposition’s ministerial share]. Reports said Hezbollah told Aoun not to give up the Telecom Ministry, because it has a security dimension […] Although the Saudi-Syrian summit has positively affected Lebanon, I think Syria has not decided yet on whether or not to pressure its allies to facilitate the cabinet formation.
Is Hariri shocked by Aoun’s statements?
Zahraman: Yes of course, because the way in which Aoun spoke contradicted the positive atmosphere of the deliberations.
Will the awaited meeting between Aoun and Hariri be held?
Zahraman: Until now there is nothing. Some parties are currently deploying efforts to hold the meeting, but if it is not held by Monday, then it will not take place at all… I think this would be a negative step taken by the opposition that would lead the country into a crisis.
Will the meeting, if held, resolve the impasse?
Zahraman: It is difficult to remedy the repercussions of Aoun’s speech on Wednesday. I am not saying it is impossible, but it remains difficult to do so.
Difficult? So how long do you expect the crisis to last?
Zahraman: Hariri will meet with [President Michel] Sleiman tomorrow [on Saturday], and we expect Aoun and Hariri to meet as well. We need to see the outcome of these two meetings. If we fail to remedy the repercussions of Aoun’s statement and if we fail to form the cabinet this week or the following one, Lebanon will surely enter a severe political crisis.
Will Hariri present another cabinet lineup to President Michel Sleiman if talks with Aoun fail?
Zahraman: It is possible, especially if [Hariri] reaches a dead end.
How far are we from reaching that dead end?
Zahraman: I do not think we have reached it yet, because the atmosphere still shows that negotiations [on the government formation] can continue.
Aoun has demanded applying the swapping of ministerial portfolios to all ministries including the Finance Ministry, why is the majority refusing this suggestion?
Zahraman: We support the concept of swapping ministries, since ministerial portfolios do not belong to specific parties. But, when it comes to the Finance Ministry, the finance minister should be affiliated with the PM or else the latter cannot do anything. The finance minister cannot be from the opposition, especially with the political divide in the country and the lack of trust between the opposition and majority.
But Aoun says that as long as the Future Movement holds on to the Finance Ministry, he has the right to hold on to the Telecom Ministry, which he already has.
Zahraman: We are a majority, and the cabinet should reflect the people’s will. He cannot impose his conditions just because he is a minority…The Telecom Ministry is debatable, because it is no longer an ordinary ministry. It has become the fifth sovereign ministry due to its political and strategic perspectives. Reports said Hezbollah told Aoun not to give up the Telecom Ministry, which means Hezbollah fears granting it to the majority.
Aren’t matters deeper than the Telecom Ministry? Hezbollah has its communications network and has clearly stated, throughout the May 7 events, that it will protect it by all means. How much will Hezbollah’s communication network and security be affected by who runs the Telecom portfolio?
Zahraman: I do not think there is a huge effect. What can the majority do if it has the Telecom Ministry? In May 7, [the majority] took a decision and failed to implement it. If the Telecom Ministry remains with the opposition, then this will affect the investigation into the Hariri assassination and all the other assassinations… “Super minister” Gebran Bassil did not give data on the Bohsas explosion against the Lebanese army in Tripoli. Also, when Abdullah Ghandour was killed in Tripoli, no data was given to the judiciary. However, the Telecom Ministry easily supplies Hezbollah with data, while it complicates the process for the judiciary. Hezbollah relied on data from the Telecom Ministry in Salah Ezzedine’s case to get a hold of him. If they have the ministry, then they will obstruct many things for us, but if it is with us, we are unable to implement any decision we take.
Is it true that the US is obstructing the cabinet formation as stated by the opposition figures?
Zahraman: I do not think so… The majority has an interest in forming the cabinet soon, because we had promised the people during the elections to carry out an economic and political program, and we have no interest in causing any delay… [The opposition] do, because they are waiting for some positive regional change that would allow them to exert more pressure and increase their gains.
After Walid Jumblatt’s split from the March 14 alliance, will the 15-10-5 formula actually be 12-14-4 in favor of the opposition?
Zahraman: I think Jumblatt’s split was a tactical rather than strategic [decision], and until now he is still within the majority. We accepted the 15-10-5 cabinet formula in the second tenure based on these premises. Otherwise, we would have considered another formula... I do not think the 12-14-4 will be implemented. However, one of the president’s ministers will most probably vote with the opposition. Thus the latter’s share will become 11, and it would be able to obstruct the cabinet decisions… The president should ensure balance in any political crisis.
What guarantees that Jumblatt’s ministers will not vote with opposition?
Zahraman: That is what he said. I do not know what might change.
Will Hariri step down from his post for a second time?
Zahraman: Until now no. However, if we reach a deadlock, he might.
What if he does?
Zahraman: I think if the cabinet is not formed within 10 days or two weeks, Lebanon will enter an open crisis and no cabinet will be formed.
What about the Ministerial Statement and the clause related to Hezbollah and its weapons?
Zahraman: There will be many controversial issues related to the Ministerial Statement, and drafting it will take a lot of time amid the current political divide and lack of trust… Even when it is concluded, more crises will come up. We all support the Resistance, and we value Hezbollah’s efforts and sacrifices to liberate the South. But the weapons issue needs to be discussed in depth. Before we discuss disarmament, we need to know if Hezbollah’s weapons are against Israel or will be used domestically. Yesterday, Aoun was saying that Hezbollah’s arsenal is for resisting [the enemy] and will only be used domestically when needed. What does this mean? Who defines ‘when needed’… Does the presence of their arsenal contradict UN Security Council Resolution 1701? And who takes the peace-and-war decisions?
If we are amid an open crisis, why isn’t a majority cabinet formed?
Zahraman: The true crisis is that a Lebanese party [a reference to Hezbollah] is armed … The state should control all weapons, and it is responsible for making peace-and-war decisions.
Do you fear security breaches amid the open crisis you mentioned?
Zahraman: If we face an open crisis, then the security situation is at stake… The question is: Are security breaches a means to pressure the majority to concede? Syrian newspapers intend to divert all negative attention away from Syria through reports of Al-Qaeda members infiltrating Lebanon.
Do you fear another series of assassinations?
Zahraman: It is possible, and this is a means to pressure the majority.
How do you evaluate the army’s role amid these insurgencies?
Zahraman: The army does not have the necessary political coverage to perform its duties…Let Aoun blame his allies, who have security zones where the army is forbidden from deploying. His allies do not give the Lebanese army the political coverage to carry out its duties

Who really won the elections?
Does it even matter?
Lebanon Now/Nicholas Lowry , October 23, 2009
Five months after the June 7 parliamentary elections, and still with no new cabinet, it looks increasingly likely that the initial narrative to emerge from the vote —“Pro-Western forces defeat Hezbollah and allies”— will be nearly reversed by the time a government is formed.
When that time arrives is anyone’s guess — and so far whenever the negotiations over the next government have seemed on the verge of concluding another monkey wrench has been throw in the works, as happened earlier this week when Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, the opposition’s leading Christian politician, dashed hopes that things were finally settled with renewed demands for additional representation in cabinet.
But while Lebanon’s long feuding political leaders continue to jostle over who gets which ministry, a consensus has been reached on what the basic division of the cabinet will be. The formula would have President Michel Sleiman appoint five, ostensibly independent ministers, while the March 14 coalition would get 15 and March 8 the remaining 10.
On paper that would be enough to accomplish one of the majority’s main electoral goals, preventing the opposition from securing veto power over cabinet, which requires 11 ministers. However, by the terms of the accepted formula one of the president's picks will be Shia, and will “probably vote with the opposition… and able to obstruct the cabinet decisions,” as Lebanon First bloc and March 14 MP Khaled Zahraman told NOW on Friday. In other words, March 8 will have de facto veto power.
Add to this — or perhaps subtract — the fact that three of the majority’s fifteen ministries will be chosen by Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt, who in August announced that he was withdrawing from the coalition to reposition himself as an independent, and March 14’s very majority starts looking tenuous.
The looming question is how the 15-10-5 formula that all sides have implicitly accepted will operate in practice, particularly with regard to the PSP. While Jumblatt’s three ministers would hold the ostensible balance of power, it is unclear what actual independence means in Lebanon’s highly polarized political landscape, where middle ground is often a lonely and powerless place.
That at least would seem to be one of the lessons of Michel Sleiman’s consensus presidency. While Sleiman is one of the few figures in the country with real cross-denominational support, he has rarely been able to exercise any real power as he risks losing his consensus status the moment he makes an important decision, which in Lebanon would inevitably involve taking a side.
“Sleiman’s is effectively and practically the first post-Taif presidency,” said Ousama Safa, the director of the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies, referring to the accord that ended the civil war. “We are seeing what the changes in Taif meant – the president has become at the mercy of the various political powers in the country…. [He must perform] a delicate dance, cannot anger people and must always be in the middle.”
Will the same now be true for the PSP? With Lebanon’s political establishment even less accessible than normal given the tense negotiations over cabinet, few wanted to speculate on record about the political approach Jumblatt’s ministers would take. Zahraman, the March 14 MP, said he believed that Jumblatt would probably in practice remain within the majority, though others in March 14 have grumbled that the PSP seats in cabinet would lean toward Hezbollah.
One source close to the PSP, however, maintained that the party would not be in lockstep with either side. Predicting that the next cabinet would be more inclined to compromise than the last, he said the PSP ministers would vote with Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri on some matters, but would be less opposed to Hezbollah on a number of hot button issues and more supportive on measures relating to Palestinians and confronting Israeli aggression.
But so will Hariri, the source added, saying that the two coalitions have both agreed to move the most divisive and important issues, like Hezbollah’s weapons and the national defense strategy, out of cabinet, dealing with them instead in outside forums like the national dialogue table.
Safa also said the next cabinet will likely be more consensus-oriented. “The thinking behind the [15-10-5] formula was not who will have a majority or minority, it was that this is a consensus based cabinet,” he said. “The composition [of the cabinet] aside, it all depends on the government statement, as long as the government statement reflects consensus you’ll have a smooth-sailing government, and if its contentious, no matter the formula, there will be trouble.”
And at any rate, even if the opposition didn’t have 11 votes in cabinet they could always walkout, as they did in the last government, Safa added.
Still, he said, the more time that passes since the elections, the less the luster of March 14’s June 7 victory.
The sense that March 14 is playing against the clock was echoed by at least one voice in the majority. Nassir Assad, a columnist for Hariri’s newspaper, Al-Mustaqbal, said that “[March 14] would like to see a cabinet formed the sooner the better because every day [without a cabinet] represents an obstacle and a loss for the prime minister designate and the March 14 bloc.”But if time seems to have steadily diminished the dimensions of March 14’s victory in the elections, it may have been incorrect to imagine Lebanon’s elections as producing winners and losers in the western electoral sense, as Safa cautioned.
Elections in this country are not decisive events where the popular will of the people is decided and the composition of the next government defined, Safa said. “Elections here are not about who is the majority and who is the minority. Elections here have never been able to answer those questions.”
As such, the capacity of elections, and by extension government, to solve the country’s enormous problems is limited. As Safa put it, “It’s naïve though to think that Lebanon’s governance crisis will be solved by a ministerial statement or the formation of a cabinet. It’s much deeper than that. It’s a crisis of the system that has proven its age and inability to continue. Unless you take a hard and inward look, you’re probably not going to get anywhere.”

Sleiman Franjieh
October 23, 2009
On October 22, the Lebanese National News Agency (NNA) carried the following report:
Following his meeting with Palestinian Authority representative Abbas Zaki on Thursday, Marada Movement leader MP Sleiman Franjieh said that “making concessions to serve the interests of the country is not a loss, and no team should consider that by getting this concession he won over the other or that there is a winning team and a loser team in this country.
Today, the country needs a government and concord and needs people to talk to each other. Good talk goes far, while other talk hinders and obstructs domestic affairs and is being supported by foreign sides. If the current talk is upheld, led them form a government without us.
I have discussed with the [Zaki] the issue of the Palestinian presence in Lebanon and the related positions which are being translated by some as they wish to show that there are some in Lebanon who are against the human and living rights of the Palestinian people. However, when someone says he supports these rights, they make it look as though he was in favor of naturalization. I say we support the rights of the Palestinians without it leading to naturalization, and I have proposed a solution to ambassador Zaki which I had previously put forward during my meeting with Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri, based on which the Lebanese government would donate money to Palestinian associations or joint committees on a yearly basis to cover the medical expenses of the Palestinian people. This would be done without any commitments from the state that would -at some point- lead to naturalization. The proposal was welcomed by Sheikh Saad and Ambassador Zaki, since it prevented anyone from saying there is a team in Lebanon who does not accept these human rights. We all know that Lebanon is a mixture of sects and this action should be carried out without creating any concerns for any sect or team. This vision reassures everyone and serves Lebanon’s interests.”
In response to a question regarding the government formation, Franjieh said, “You all know that five portfolios were recently offered to the Change and Reform bloc, recognizing the fact that due to the number of deputies it has in parliament, the bloc is entitled to six portfolios. Nonetheless, General Aoun accepted these five portfolios and we accepted them along with him. However, these portfolios included a Ministry of State while the General was demanding five. This created a problem for Sheikh Saad because there were four ministries of state that should be given to someone. So I said that if us taking a ministry of state can facilitate things and hasten the formation, we accept it to prevent obstruction and to serve the country’s interests, and I informed General Aoun of this position on Monday.
I sensed that the General was not holding on to any portfolio in particular but to the nature of the portfolios seeing how the Change and Reform bloc did not get any key or services ministries. So, General Aoun suggested the replacement of a key ministry without two services ministries and things started proceeding in the right direction. However, some considered that all that the General gained from this entire ordeal was the appointment of his son-in-law as minister and that it was a defeat for the opposition and the Free Patriotic Movement. There was a sort of gloating as though there was a victor and a loser. What was more noticeable was Sheikh Saad visit to Maarab where he had dinner shortly after Dr. Samir Geagea’s talk.
This put us back where we are today. We made concessions, but did not lose and we gave without allowing anything to be taken from us.
General Aoun gave but did not allow anyone to take anything from him. But when some make it look as though the General lost, we all return to his side. In this context, I do not believe that these statements were against us or against General Aoun. They targeted Sheikh Saad Hariri in person because the primary loser from the obstruction of the government formation is Sheikh Saad.”
Asked about him getting the Interior Ministry, Franjieh said, “The Interior Ministry or the Defense Ministry? I have always said I will not personally be a minister in the government and I now reiterate my position. As to which portfolio will be given to us, that is the least of my concerns. Today, what concerns me is that the country needs a government, concord and for the people to get to know each other, sit with each other and talk. We want to build a country and we cannot do that while each of us is sits on the opposite side of the other. It is not in our interest to see the destruction of the country or infighting. Our interest resides in dialogue and I think we should all open our eyes and see who is the most damaged by this. In my opinion, things are becoming clearer bit by bit.
We are not back to square one and things are proceeding. Some are trying to obstruct the process but the intentions are positive and the obstruction is internal but is being exploited by external sides.
For example, when America wants to obstruct, it seeks someone whose interests through this obstruction intersect with its own. Is it Sheikh Saad? No because he is the prime minister. America’s interests intersected with those of people who thrive on obstruction.
Nonetheless, the government formation will be announced within the next few days, and I still believe there are people who do not want to see this formation.
If the current climate is upheld with some saying that the General is neither giving nor taking nor capable of getting anything, things will not proceed. But were they to say ‘thank you for your concessions,’ all will be well. It is about good words that can facilitate the situation. We made concessions to secure solutions and the country’s best interest, so is that a problem? Not at all, since the state is bankrupt and the most we can get with a portfolio is burdens and concerns, let them take all the burdens and concerns and we will do just fine with a Ministry of State.”