The International Tribunal: for the government a positive step, for the opposition a threat
Beirut (AsiaNews) – Fresh clashes between the Lebanese army and Fatah al Islam rebels broke out overnight in the Nahr al-Bared camp. Prime Minster Fouad Siniora considers the group “linked to Syrian intelligence” and part of the “threats” with which Damascus seeks to “intimidate” the Lebanese and block the UN’s decision to open the international tribunal into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri.
The Security Council’s decision taken May 30th is in fact subject to opposing opinions, between those - such ad Syria and its allies - who judge it as “dangerous” for Lebanon and a “violation” of national sovereignty and those - such as the ruling majority and other Arab nations – who instead see it as a way to stop political violence in the country, as well as finding those responsible for political attacks in recent years. Lebanon’s Chief of Staff Samire Geagea, maintains the tribunal is in the best interest of the nation, as does ex President Amin Gemayel “it is an important event which should bring some joy after all of the tragic events which we have suffered and all of the martyrs who have fallen in the name of freedom and independence”.
From Damascus however, Al-Thawra writes of “the politicization of the inquiries” adding that the UN resolution “curtails Lebanon's sovereignty, will heighten division, and will have a [negative] impact on national unity”. For its part, Teshreen maintains that it is “a distinctly American-Israeli resolution which cannot be seen as expressing the will of the international community”, and that it “may have dangerous repercussions for Lebanese national unity”.
Hezbollah’s declarations echo this sentiment - “a violation of the sovereignty of Lebanon” and “a great gift to the American administration” – that is “illegal and illegitimate both nationally and internationally” and from the Parliament Speaker, Nabih Berri, - “Lebanon’s Constitution has been violated” – who has for months refused to call the Chamber to vote on the approval of the Tribunal. President of the Republic, Emile Lahoud was sharper in his criticism – the decision to create the tribunal “has sparked fear in the hearts of many Lebanese and in that of a brother nation, above all the fear to see it work towards an objective that is far removed from its primary aim” – and General Michel Aoun who on the one hand expressed his concern that “the Tribunal maybe politically motivated. But if it operates as a Tribunal seeking justice, then I think it will gain the consensus of the all Lebanese people”, while on the other he says that, so far, he has not seen “any accusation against Syria in the enquiry”, hoping that “in the end those responsible will be found”.
In real terms, the work of the International Commission has so far indicated in Lebanon, nine accused who deny any involvement, four of who are in prison. These are men who held key positions during Syria’s occupation of the Country: they include presidential guard chief General Mustafa Hamdan, former general security chief General Jamil al-Sayed, ex-internal security head General Ali al-Hage and former army intelligence director General Raymond. They other five, one of who is Syrian, are believed to have been directly involved in carrying out the attack. Moments before the attack – which caused 22 victims – one of them used his cel phone to call Lahoud, who denies all knowledge.
The Commission has indicated three Syrian suspects – none of whom have been imprisoned by Damascus – among them Rustom Ghazaleh, former head of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon.
.png)
