Hariri's death

[Islamic Revival]

As-salam alaikum,

Doesn't Hariri's death seem to be at a very convenient time when the US wants to implicate Syria for its future plans in the region?

The blast in Beirut has come completely out of the blue, and will help the US and its puppets to point the finger at Syria, nudging public opinion in its favour.

Comments?

[maruf]

This analysis by 1924.org seems to agree with your thinking islamic revival. It gives some detail.

was-salaam

Who was behind the assassination of Hariri?

The assassination of Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister of Lebanon has spurred America and Israeli officials to take a tough stand against Syria. Despite no direct evidence to link Syria to the attack, America was quick to warn Syria of dire consequences. The spokesman for the White House, Scott McClellan said, “"This murder today is a terrible reminder that the Lebanese people must be able to pursue their aspirations and determine their own political future, free from violence, and intimidation and free from Syrian occupation.”[1] McClellan stressed that it was "premature" to say who was to blame, but he called the attack "an attempt to stifle the efforts of those who want an independent and sovereign Lebanon that is free of foreign occupation, that is free of the involvement of Syria in that country." US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discussed the matter with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and also planned to speak to the French government, said State Department spokesman Richard Boucher. [2]. Only recently Bush criticised Syria in his annual State of the Union speech saying Damascus "still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region."[3]. The Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom in a candid statement suggested Syrian involvement in the bombing. He said, ” I cannot say for certain that Syria is behind this attack but there are many groups which could have carried it out. There is no doubt that Syria, which supports [the Lebanese Shia militia] Hezbollah, [the radical Palestinian groups] Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups that are opposed to the democratisation of the Middle East, is uncomfortable with the prospect of elections in Lebanon and the last thing they want is to be forced to leave Lebanon. “[4]. On the other hand the European response was reserved. Jacques Chirac, French president said,” France strongly condemns this crime. It asks that an international inquiry be launched without delay to determine the circumstances of this tragedy and who is responsible. France, like the entire international community, will closely follow the unfolding of this situation.” [5]. However, there was wall-to-wall condemnation from Hamas, Hizbullah, pro –Syrian MPs and the Syrian Government. Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, said, “The Syrian government and people stand alongside brotherly Lebanon in this dangerous situation and convey our sincerest condolences to the family of Mr Hariri and the families of the other victims.” [6]. In marked contrast there was outrage amongst the political opposition and the Lebanese people against the Syria, which maintains some 16000 troops. On 14/02/05, members of the Lebanese opposition movement issued a statement holding Syria and the Lebanese government negligent in Mr. Hariri's death.

So who benefits from this situation the most – Israel, America or Syria?

It is well known that Hirari fell out with the Syrian regime last year over the decision of the Lebanese parliament extended Emile Lahoud's (pro Syrian) term in office for a further six years. This action was widely seen as increasing Syria’s grip on Lebanese politics. Hirari also called for Syria’s withdrawal from Lebanon and supported the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1559, which demands a full withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon. The Syrians to date have not fully withdrawn from Lebanon either military or from its politics. Hirari was also a strong supporter of Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and had ties with the mainly Christian opposition. Therefore some are speculating that the Syria had the motive to assassinate Hirari in the hope of shoring up its political base in the forth-coming elections. Actually the converse is true. The Syrian regime is already suffering from punitive sanctions and its every action is closely scrutinised by Israel and America. Hence it is very unlikely that Syria would have undertaken such an action. For it knows too well that such an act would undermine its authority in Lebanon and invite a serious response from America.

Rather the assassination needs to be viewed in the wider context of the Sharm-el- Shiekh meeting where Palestinian President Abbas met with Israeli Prime Minister Sharon to discuss the peace process. The emphasis of the talks was on security, which primarily focussed on how to reign in Palestinian militants. To facilitate this, America pledged aid for the Palestinian Authority, appointed a Lt General to oversee security issues and also asked Egypt and Jordan to help the Palestinian and the Israelis to subdue the militants. So far Abbas has been struggling to put a halt to their activities, especially Hamas that recently carried out mortar attacks against Israeli settlements. In response Abbas sacked the overall commander of Palestinian, Gen Abdul Razek Majaidie, along with national police chief Saeb al-Ajez and another senior official. But this is not enough to halt the attacks and he still needs American and Israeli support to disarm the militant groups who enjoy support from neighbouring Lebanon and Syria. This is the only significant event to occur before Hirari assassination.

Israel and America on a number of occasions have chastised Syria and pressed upon the Baath regime to deny military, financial and territorial support to these organisations. In May 2004, President Bush banned US exports to Syria apart from food and medicine, stopped Syrian aircraft from flying to and from the United States and froze the assets of Syrians suspected of violating a law passed by the US Congress in November 2003. But back then the US was unable to take further action because Sharon was facing difficulty in mustering support for his Gaza withdrawal plan and Bush’s re-election was looming.

But after Bush’s state of the union address and the meeting between Abbas and Sharon, it appears that America intends to rollback Syria’s occupation of Lebanon and severe its links to the Palestinian militants. Thereby allowing Israel to press ahead with the Gaza withdrawal plan. The bombing gives America and Israel the perfect opportunity to create popular resentment against Syria’s occupation of Lebanon as well as seeking international consensus on punitive measures against Syria. "We're going to turn up the heat on Syria, that's for sure," said a senior State Department official. "It's been a pretty steady progression of pressure up to now, but I think it's going to spike in the wake of this event. Even though there's no evidence to link it to Syria, Syria has, by negligence or design, allowed Lebanon to become destabilized." [7]

Thus developments on the ground appear to be in agreement with the statements from American and Israeli officials and also provide a clear indication of how they expect Syria to behave. The next step is for America to push for a UN resolution asking Syria to withdraw or face stern action. This will raise the spectre of violence in the coming days. Hence the real benefactors are Israel and America and it is most likely that they were behind the Hariri’ death.

February 15, 2005

[1] Source: BBC Online, News Item: Syria under pressure after bomb, Date: 15/2/05
[2] Source Channel News Asia Online, News Item: US angered by Hirari slaying, warns Syria, Date: 15/2/05
[3] Ibid
[4] Source BBC Online, News Item: In quotes: World reacts to Hariri death, Date: 15/2/05
[5] Ibid
[6] Ibid
[7] Source: New York Times, News Item: U.S. Seems Sure of the Hand of Syria, Hinting at Penalties, Date 15/02/05

[maruf]

The comments that follow below are from another list:

was-salaam






The discussion around this issue by two respected brothers illustrates how tricky and difficult analyzing assassinations. Especially when analysts are bombarded with conflicting information.

The most important aspect analyzing such events is to identify and determine political facts, and to avoid logical conclusions. Equally important is to carefully review immediate reactions by major players and the change of reactions along the line.

Political Facts:

Hariri was a solid ally to USA
Hariri worked hard to minimize or eliminate the influence of pro Europe in Lebanon
Hariri represented the political arm of US in Lebanon while Syria ensured the military stability of Lebanon. Together Hariri and Syria worked to build the new army, and the new loyalties in Lebanon
USA is facing a volatile situation in Iraq. With the exception of pro Iran in Iraq, US has little loyal players. Pro Iran are not reliable because the situation in Iran itself is volatile and those pro Iran think they are actually against establishing a US influence in Iraq
The conflict between US and Europe in the Middle East is serious
The assassination came shortly after a visit by Ms. Rice to the region where she asked Israel to be ready for serious concessions around Jerusalem
The Syrian announced that they are ready to reestablish negotiations with Israel without previous conditions, and Israel replied that Syria has to stop supporting terrorist groups before engaging in any negotiations
Hariri’s mobility in Lebanon has been safe and secured by state of the art security machine and personnel
The opponents of US in Lebanon gathered momentum and challenged Syria publicly
It seemed contradictory that Syria supported US in Iraq and Lebanon, but US issued statements and supported resolutions demanding that Syria leaves Lebanon
Prior to the assassination of Hariri, the opponent of Syria made a huge propaganda campaign that Syria is involved in assassination attempts and they created a public opinion that Syria wants to assassinate its opponents
There main players are:

The Americans
The Europeans
The Israelis
The Syrians
The Jihadists
The Lebanese Government
More important than reaching a conclusion around the assassination is understanding the political situation in the ME and Lebanon.

The key to analyzing the situation is to understand # 10 above. Did a change in the historic political understanding between Syria and US occur recently? The political facts don’t indicate that. Syria, Iran, and Lebanon worked according to US plan in Iraq at a time they could’ve created serious harm to US. They facilitated and supported the process of voting in Iraq. They recognized, practically, the appointed government in Iraq. And they were in line with the US political moves in Palestine.

So why is this demand that Syria leaves Lebanon? Well, simply it is in the best interest of US that Syria leaves Lebanon. The country is in the hands of US via Hariri, Berri, Hizbullah, and the Lebanese army that was built under the Syrian eye for 15 years. The departure of the Syrians from Lebanon opens the door for the departure of Israelis from Golan’s Highest, and a comprehensive settlement with Israel. The only way to paralyze this is by destabilizing Lebanon, and by forcing Syria to stay in Lebanon.

There is no doubt that those who assassinated Hariri wanted to destabilize Lebanon. They wanted Syria to stay in Lebanon at a time Syria was secretly planning with Hariri a staged and organized withdrawal from Lebanon proven by many statements, redeployments on the ground, and US political moves to grant a victory for Syria (Being alone in the face of US). Hariri joined pro Europe camp but kept a distance from their request that Syria leaves now (unorganized withdrawal). His goal was clear: Weaken the opposition. Syria and Hariri wanted a voting that breaks the back of the opposition and the opposition wanted to illegitimatize the elections and the new government

Immediately after the assassination, US announced that it was early to determine responsibility when the media was pressuring the spokesperson to accuse Syria. Later US demanded international investigation. Looking deeply into the issue, this could be a savior for Syria. It is impossible, from a criminology point of view, to investigate and reach a conclusive and absolute verdict, so the investigation would lead to "no conclusive evidence to the involvement of Syria" saving Syria from a convection by the media by a UN verdict

The later announcements by US that the relation with Syria is deteriorating is a declaration that US is willing to go to war over Lebanon even by invading Syria (to protect it from potential coups and / or destabilization by its opponents). US announced that they don’t know how much Assad is in control in Syria. They are deeply troubled and may have to move to save their influence in Syria before it becomes a hub for resistance. The unknown organization that declared responsibility made it clear that the attack was the first in a serious of attacks to come later in Bilad Alsham.

[maruf]

At the time Syria opened the door for the return of opponents even the talk for the release of Ja3ja3 from prison. Syria wanted to leave Lebanon and to weaken the opposition not to destabilize Lebanon and to strengthen the opposition. The opposition knew that they would lose the election, and be away from the influential positions of the government. The escape goats in the plan would’ve been Karami and Lahoud.

It was an obvious play when Syria insisted the extension of Lahoud presidency creating a "tensions" with Hariri. The goal was to save the face of Hariri and to direct opposition to focus on the extension of the president while planning an election that would lead to a strong return of Hariri and Syrian supporters (Hariri stood up to Syria and reached out to the opposition). The seen yesterday in Beirut was supposed to be the celebration after the election; Hariri would reach an agreement with Syria to withdraw 100% from Lebanon and to sign special relationship treaty that would resemble the treaty that US is preparing to sign with Iraq ie withdrawal of army and legitimizing the influence. The Syrian plan collapsed with the death of Hariri. Nothing else could’ve prevented marginalizing the opposition, and moving the ball to the Israeli and European field.

The minister of interior of the Lebanese government, Franjiah, accused "a suicide man that is appointed by international entities" to be behind the assassination. This was the most interesting accusation. He could’ve easily said Israel, but this is a direct accusation for the Europeans. The minister knows that assassination couldn’t have happened without knowing Hariri’s schedule, and without facilitating either the implant of the bomb or the coordination of the attack. The size of the attack is evidence that the planners knew exactly how much power is needed to destroy the armored vehicle that Hariri uses, and used more than enough to nail him.

Based on that it is not likely that the US is behind the assassination because Hariri has been a strong ally, and there was no reason or an indication that he changed; on the contrary all moves indicate that he was loyal to US.

It is not in the interest of Syria and Lebanon to assassinate Hariri or Jumblat especially after the opposition succeeded to create a public opinion that Syria is planning to assassinate major opponents. As a result of the assassination Syria and the Lebanese government are in a weak position.

The reason that the family of Hariri refused the government involvement in the funeral and asked for a public funeral is clear. The family wanted to stay on course separating itself from an unpopular regime that Hariri, himself, created. All the financial troubles and political arrangements happened on the watch of Hariri, but with his latest maneuver, he and Syria ie US, succeeded to separate him from the history of financial trouble in the country and positioned him to comeback and rule.