Opposition Protests In Lebanon and the Paris III Conference: When the Global Economy Comes to the Rescue of the Bush Doctrine

Look at this picture, taken from Le Monde, showing the political forces in presence in Lebanon as well as the communities they represent. It si clear that Sanyura's government is not representative of the Lebanese people. But will western governments understand this fact ?

The street protests of yesterday, accompanied by a general strike and lead by the opposition forces to Sanyura's government (A majority of the shias and a sizeable part of the Christians, as well as part of the Sunni and the Druze communities), have paralysed the country and resulted in the killing of five people and the wounding of more than hundred others. Although they may appear as having abruptly ended, they were meant to give a clear signal to western governments that their puppet government, the government of Fouad Sanyura and of the March 14th movement, does not control the country. But I am afraid western governments will not understand the signal.

What should western governments do if they were really commited to democracy in the middle east (commitment termed usually as the 'Bush Doctrine'*) ? They should call for early elections in Lebanon, with or without a newly crafted electoral law. The present electoral law was designed by the Syrians to give electoral majority to their old allies in Lebanon, Jumblatt, Hariri, and the Lebanese forces, those who are sitting in the Sanyura government now and call themselves anti-Syrian forces. Everybody recognises - including Sanyura himself who promised the opposition to change the electoral law, and later retracted - that the elections that gave way to the present government were made hastily after the Syrian withdrawal. The 2005 parliamentary elections were held less than two months after the Syrian withdrawal and were the first legislative elections to take place in 30 years in the absence of the Syrian military presence - given also the fact that during the 15 year civil war (1975-1990) there were no elections. But western governments are not committed to democracy in the Middle East. They are committed to maintaining submissive regimes and puppet head of governments and states. So the Paris conference, falsely called the Aid conference for Lebanon, while it is really made to impose on the puppet Lebanese government IMF's unsuccessful old practices in Latin American economies like in Argentina, will give money to a minority government, assorted with conditions that the present Lebanese economy will not be able to meet. The reason this government will not be able to meet the conditions for the economic reforms required by the 'aid' are obvious; absence of legitimacy to implement reforms, corruption of the political elite who is in the government, political instability, and extreme damage of infrastructure made during the last July agression on Lebanon.

The 'aid', if given in these circumstances, will harden the authoritarian stance of the Sanyura government because, having international creditors, he will feel protected by these creditors who trusted him with the task to implement the economic reforms and the return of investment on the money. Moreover, in this country riddled by corruption, it will concentrate the money in the hands of the few who are in the government and their protégés. This will not be money for the lebanese economy, neither for the Lebanese as a people, this will be the money of a clique who is more a militia than a government and who will rule Lebanon with the brutal authority given to it by international creditors, ignoring the legitimate demands of the opposition forces - as it is doing now - and the aspirations of the Lebanese people.

It is plainly obvious that lending to the Sanyura government is foreign political interference disguised under the banner of economic reforms and aid. Because, in the present climate of political instability in Lebanon, no reasonable investor would lend money to such an embattled government if it wasn't for political gain. The end result will be to take the country and its inhabitants as hostages to foreign investors, later justifying a more active military foreign interference to support the already embattled government.

Link to the document on economic reforms prepared by the Sanyura government for the paris III conference and rejected by the opposition. Taken from French Eagle.

* What lies at the heart of the Bush Doctrine is military intervention in foreign countries in order to install puppet governments, whenever the interests of the US and Israel are at stake. Look at Arab government and rulers who have the blessings of the Bush Doctrine: The Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Sanyura's government, and so on...These are called 'moderates' by Bush and Rice. Extremism is not what Bush pretends 'They hate our freedoms' but rather 'They want their freedom from US' (to quote Robert Fisk) and from Israel.