Political Analyst: Lebanese Complaint to AL Media-Oriented, Untrue
Local Editor
The Lebanese-Syrian border once again steals the spotlight. Syrian assaults on innocent citizens in al-Bekaa villages exceeded all codes and customs. The chaotic frontlines requiring alertness from the Lebanese government did not reap but a mere complaint to the Arab League, in which the Army stressed the security measures it takes to protect its citizens. This was rather acceptable in its appearance, however defective in content.
Political analyst Johnny Mnayar and university professor Ali al-Shami placed the complaint raised in the security meeting in Baabda on Monday to the AL - expressing Lebanon's opposition to these repetitive assaults by the armed groups - in a formal and media framework, but also admitted to the significance of opposing Syrian violations.
For his part, Head of al-Itihad Party Abdel Rahim Murad went far beyond this analysis, and described the Lebanese government's stance as wrong and untrue, stating, "Complaints must be submitted to the countries sponsoring and harboring terrorists, not the opposite."
Al-Shami, however, further recapped the Arab League's latest decisions on the necessity of arming Syrian militiamen, chiefly Qatar, which requires a conclusive stance "to those who breach our country's security."
Moreover, he considered the complaint memo as good, yet its efficiency only involved the necessity of convicting the armed groups and its funders, based on the principle of not intervening in countries' internal affairs and respecting its sovereignty.
Al-Shami added, "Any assault or bombing from any party is inacceptable and one must separate between the concept of government and political forces who want reform and change."
He further called on to submit the complaint to the UN's Security Council and other rights organizations.
On this note, Mnayar's stance was harmonious with al-Shami, "The Lebanese stance is more media-oriented than genuine, and the appropriate thing to do was to address the United Nations and active countries."
Likewise, he criticized the government's negligence in treating the border crisis, and considered that the people responsible should regulate the Syrian presence in Lebanon like in Jordan and Turkey procedures.
He further expressed optimism regarding the government restoring its role on the borders, and stressed that conclusive steps must be taken in case the armed men in Syria violated Lebanese sovereignty, otherwise the borders should strictly be sealed and the Lebanese Army must fire on anyone on the borderline.
The armed militias sought to destroy Syria and to turn it into a bloody battlefield. This conclusion Mnayar came up with reiterated that because of Lebanon's surrender to pressures, it had become a Syrian battlefield. The random bombing on the borders is clear evidence of this, and kidnapping incidents happening in Tripoli and Beirut's streets indicate that "we are in the heart of the crisis."
In this context, many people considered that the Lebanese government is joining Saudi Arabia and Qatar after balancing between the Syrian Army defending itself in Arsal and the Syrian citizens being bombed in al-Qaser. This coincides with the US Secretary of State's statement that assumed obscurity and deemed the culprit anonymous, although the so-called Free Syrian Army and al-Nusra Front adopted the assault.
For his part, Mrad saw that "the US stance is not unusual, since the US has military bases in Arsal that smuggle weapons into Syria and facilitate the terrorists' missions."
According to al-Shami, "The US's double-standard statements are not contradictory, but are entirely consistent with the US policy in the region."
This theory is accentuated by Mounir, who stated, "Washington's stances are known, but I stress that there is a new map being drawn in the Middle East and they believe that the Boston explosion will greatly move this change forward unlike anything of last year."
Source: al-Ahed News, translated and edited by moqawama.org
