Connelly to Jumblatt and Geagea: Boycott Hariri’s Recklessness

Nasser Sharara -Al-Akhbar daily*

Last week was remarkably a busy one for the US Ambassador to Lebanon, as she applied herself to informing Walid Jumblatt and Samir Geagea of the necessity to boycott the recklessness of Saad Hariri and shrug off the phone calls of Bandar Bin Sultan, demanding to oust the government of Najib Mikati.

Moscow, for its part, also had dealings with this.

Last week's developments definitely closed the dossier of toppling Mikati's government, as proposed by March 14 camp to shun the repercussions of General Wissam Hassan's assassination.

March 14 components, each on their own, ventured into reviewing last days events. They mostly concluded that what happened was an implication in a political and security showdown at a bad timing.

As to the Lebanese Forces, the party's leader was more than shaken. Sources close to him even said he has been through a "political shock" following the visit US envoy Maura Connelly had paid to him on October 23 to discuss with him the recent escalation on the Lebanese scene.

Connelly sought to have clarifications from Geagea about a phone call between the Saudi Intelligence Chief, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, and the LF leader; just hours after the latter held a news conference following General Hassan's assassination.
Geagea reportedly nodded his head confirming the phone call has indeed taken place. "He reproached me that I did not take more escalatory positions pertaining to the calls to oust the government," Geagea bitterly told Connelly.
In turn, the envoy commented: "Qataris in their policy are more realistic than the Saudis.

This is why they can now play a role in Lebanon and even in Palestine. We must all realize that it is forbidden to topple Mikati's government when there is no substitute."

She corroborated that it was also forbidden to shake stability and the status-quo in Lebanon amid the current juncture in the region, especially in Syria, warning that no party will be able to bear the consequences of bringing forth instability.
Connelly continued "There is no side among the Sunnites able to bring the community together. And there is no side able to bear the repercussions of toppling the government. I have asked MP Walid Jumblatt not to risk it all in his approach of the current situation."

She also told Geagea that he could preserve a certain level of relations with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia only under a realistic political ceiling. "You and Jumblatt must boycott the recklessness of Saad Hariri," she concluded.

The Plan of Misleading

In the eve of Connelly's visit to Geagea (Monday), the political cell of Future Movement, under the command of Fouad Siniora, was working on boosting the morals of its political allies. It mostly ventured into refuting the aftermath of the stance voiced by the ambassadors to Lebanon of the P5, supporting stability and refusing the ousting of the government and the subsequent political vacuum.
Future Movement spread among its allies a new-fangled interpretation of the aforesaid international stance, with Lebanese diplomats affiliated with March 14 forces colluding in leaking it.

This new interpretation focused on two matters: shedding light on a statement by the US State Secretary Hillary Clinton calling for an "efficient government that takes adequate measures," and depicting it as a rectification of the international stance supporting Mikati; and [arguing] that the European Union's higher representative Catherine Ashton said she upheld stability rather than Mikati's government.

Just a few hours later, this interpretation was seen vanishing when neutral sources from Washington explained that Clinton's statement was technical and not political, and that the explanation she conveyed through Connelly to the Lebanese officials, including Jumblatt and Geagea, was the true US political stance on what is happening in Lebanon and its connection to the Syrian events.

Suleiman-Siniora Line

Between Connelly's visit to Geagea and Washington's confirmed refusal to oust Mikati, Hariri tried to gain a political time in favor of his maneuver.
Basically, Siniora had to call upon the President of the Republic, Michel Suleiman, to bring into effect "the spirit of his agreement with Hariri" which was reached during the former's KSA visit. As per this agreement, Suleiman would support the formation of a neutral government to oversee the elections in case there was a convenient political juncture.

Siniora left Baabda palace after Suleiman vowed to feel the pulse [of the concerned parties] in that respect. However, not only did he receive utter rejection from March 8 camp, but he also sensed negative response among some of March 14 forces--as well as Jumblatt--whom Connelly has urged not to go along with Hariri's recklessness.

Contacts on the level of March 8 camp showed two stances on government's change; the first provides to settle on the electoral law in case the government dossier was broached on the dialogue table, and the second sees that changing the government cannot be envisaged at the time being, before the legislative elections.

According to the second stance, the formation of a national unity government under the chairmanship of a consensual figure would be required regardless of the results of the 2013 polls. This means that March 8 camp will no more accept Hariri for the premiership unless March 14 forces accept Michel Aoun or Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency of the Republic.

Moscow Interferes

Turning to the statement Connelly has made in comment on the Lebanese crisis, the envoy confirmed that indicators show that Barack Obama is more likely to win the presidential elections, expecting the Syrian crisis to last longer because there will be no major change of the US approach on this level.

This entails the necessity to preserve the current status-quo in Lebanon.
On the other hand, informed sources revealed that Connelly was not the only one who warned March 14 of wagering on the Syrian crisis.
In fact, Suleiman received n official message from Moscow last week that underscored Russia's firmer position vis-à-vis Syria's dossier.

The timing of the message only means that the Kremlin does not agree on any political change in Lebanon, which would replace the dissociation policy with an anti-Syria one.

*Translated and edited by moqawama.org