Blog responses to the fighting in Lebanon
"Lebanese government officials and large sections of the media are blaming the Syrian regime, without providing any proof. It’s true that Fatah al-Islam’s parent organisation was Syrian sponsored, a creation of the divisions among the Lebanese-based Palestinians following the expulsion of PLO forces by Israel in 1982, but Fateh al-Islam broke away from the parent organisation a long time ago. There is far more evidence that Fateh al-Islam is being helped by Syria’s enemies. Seymour Hersh’s recent investigation, published in the New Yorker, suggested that Saad al-Hariri, among others in the wealthy Lebanese Sunni establishment, is helping to channel American funds to Wahhabi groups to counter the influence of Shia Hizbullah.
Robert Fisk in the Independent writes 'it is difficult not to feel Syria’s hand these days.' His evidence for Syrian involvement in Nahr el-Bared? The Syrian border is 'scarcely ten miles away'."
Ali, via Beirut Spring:
"Fateh el Islam split off Fateh-el-intifada (the latter a Syrian creation) precisely because they did not want to tow the Syrian intelligence line. This was their own admission. This is an extreme Sunni organization which views Alawis and the Shia on par with the Israelis and Americans, if not worse. So why exactly does Syria finance and support an organization that regards it as heretic and sees it and its allies as the enemy?
And it seems to me that after so many alleged assassinations and aims at “destabilizing” Lebanon as the March 14th camp claims , that Syria only gets deeper in the hole, and brings even more timely pressure on itself by the US and its typical international chorus, and precipitates even more vociferous calls to push the tribunal through Chapter 7 that you would think they would have learned their lesson and laid low for a while, no?"
Labels: Lebanon
