USS Cole dispatched to the Lebanese Coast and US military involvement in Lebanon

The United States has ordered a warship to take up position off the coast of Lebanon in a show of support for the country's embattled government.

Read here on the two main historical precedents.
In 1958, the US intervened to bolster the pro-Western Lebanese government of President Camille Chamoun against internal opposition.

In 1982, US forces entered Lebanon as part of a Multinational force:

"to provide appropriate assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces as they carry out" responsibilities for the safe evacuation of the departing PLO, the safety "of the persons in the area" (generally interpreted to mean the Palestinian non-combatants remaining in Beirut), and to "further the restoration of the sovereignty and authority of the Government of Lebanon over the Beirut area." With regard to the safety of Palestinian non-combatants, the agreement stated that "The Governments of Lebanon and the United States will provide appropriate guarantees of safety. . . . "(emphasis added). In reality, the agreement was a vague and open-ended mandate for committing American military personnel.

A summary of the events of 1982 in Lebanon and a timeline on the side on this site. (The problem with the timeline is that it says when the French and the US troops were targeted by a suicide bombing but it doesn't tell when the troops entered Lebanon).

During the autumn of 1982, the presence of the Marines in Beirut began to take on an additional meaning which was never publicly acknowledged. The Marines became a bargaining chip in the complex international maneuvering that the United States was fostering. There were active negotiations among the United States, Israel, and Lebanon over the withdrawal of Israeli forces and the terms of a possible treaty between Lebanon and Israel. The presence of the Marines provided leverage in putting pressure on the Government of Lebanon to accede to Israeli demands. The presence implied some measure of protection for the Lebanese authorities against those Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Arabs who adamantly opposed any normalization between Lebanon and Israel.

I posted this Time Magazine cover from 1982 because this is the most salient feature associated in my memory with the events of 1982 in Lebanon. In 1958 I was barely born to remember. But those who slaughtered Palestinian civilians in 1982 are still around. They are the US staunchest allies in Lebanon, they are part of March 14th, the movement that is behind the present Lebanese pro-US government. The Palestinians are now gone, militarily speaking, from Lebanon, replaced by another resistance to Israel, Hezbollah and its allies. However, the slaughtering of civilians will continue, and the target this time - beside the Palestinians, always an easy target for Israel and its US ally - are Hezbollah, the Shias, and the Christians opposed to March 14th, as well as the civilians and the infrastructure around. It doesn't matter to the US that the Lebanese opposition is legitimate and enjoys the support of the majority of Lebanese. What matters for them is Israel and its clients in the country, March 14th and its illegitimate, ill elected, weak, unpopular, and amputated government. Oh yes, a show of force for the Lebanese people in order to send the message that whatever their will, if it doesn't match USrael's will, then it is not acceptable. And it is wishful thinking if the US thinks that the Lebanese people will adore this exhibition of military force...

Read here an hour by hour account from the US army of the first US Marines' landing in Beirut in 1982. At the end of the chapter you will find a link to the following chapter, and so on, all related to the presence of the US Marines in Beirut until their departure. Of particular interest is chapter 7 relating the investigation into the bombing of the US Marines in Beirut and its conclusions.

This post is mentioned by Raed Rafei in his blog's round-up on the USS cole's move, in the LA Times blogs.

Read here, in French, Lebanese blogger Frenchy, with his usual humor, commenting on the event.

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.

Living Together: Nasrallah's Speech to the December 1st protest

This is a translation of the account given in French of Nasrallah's speech to the December 1st protest, on Thursday December 7th, by Libnanews.

Supressing any sign in the protest that can be interpreted as violence.
He started his speech by asking his supporters not to resort to an old Lebanese and middle eastern tradition; firing shots of celebration at the end of the speech.

Greetings.
He greeted the protesters then evoked the spirit of the young protester, Ahmed Mahmoud, who was shot last sunday probably as a result of an attack on a group of protesters joining the protest site by militiamen from the Future movement led by Saad Hariri.

Critique of the present government, March 14th and foreign and Arab leaders in light of the latest israeli agression on lebanon.
He declared being proud of the protesters who are defying the ennemies of Lebanon, those who led a savage war on lebanon last July. He called upon them to resist any attempt to weaken the protest by those who supported the July Israeli agression on Lebanon ad who support the present government. He called on Arab leaders not to favour one party in Lebanon over another but to assist all Lebanese in order to help them not to yield under the pressure of the terrorist Bush. He invited all Arabs to open their eyes on the reality of the failing US foreign policy in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.
He found offensive the open support israel is granting to the Sanyura government targeting the magnanimous in Lebanon in order to curb their support for the December 1st protest.

A unity government with a blocking power for the opposition, no matter who is in the opposition, that's all what the December protest is about.
He highlighted the necessity of a national union government representing all Lebanese, insisting on the particular context and structure of the Lebanese society which requires a representation that adresses the concerns of all its communities. On this basis he is asking that the opposition be granted a third of the seats in the government allowing it to block some decisions, whether this opposition is Hezbollah and its allies or the actual government.

A unity government with or without the actual government consent and by peaceful means.
Nasrallah asked to maintain the protest as long as the present government stays with its actual composition. He asked that the protest be peaceful avoiding any insults, clashes or conflicts which can lead to a civil war. He assured the international community that no matter what happens Hezbollah will never brandish its weapons against its lebanese brothers because lebanese understand that a civil war is a defeat for them and a victory for their Israeli ennemy who wishes that lebanon be thrown into dark abysses. He noticed, alluding to Saudi Arabia's and Egypt's recent remarks against the anti-Sanyura protest, that Israel is already inciting these Arab leaders to throw panic on the lebanese by warning them from a risk of civil war.

Hezbollah's intentions on the short term and its code of conduct during the protest.
Nasrallah confirmed that his party will fight those who intended to plant discord among Lebanese by killing Ahmed Mahmoud. He said that a thousand others Ahmed Mahmoud may fall but the Hezbollah resistance will not be driven into raising its arms against its Lebanese brothers and those who would fall would have done so for the love of their country, Lebanon. Hezbollah will work to avoid civil war in Lebanon. Hezbollah will maintain peaceful protests without resorting to any form of armed protest defying his detractors who are staking on a possible conflict. He exhorted Lebanese not to fall in the trap made by forces close to the Sanyura government whop are trying to portray the actual confrontation as a confrontation between Sunnis and Shias. He insisted that the opposition to the Sanyura government is composed of lebanese from all religions and sects and invited the Arab league (this same Arab league who does not move a finger when palestinians are slaughtered by Isreal but who seems mved by the opposition to the Sanyura government) to inquire on the site of the protest about the fact that the opposition to Sanyura comes from all religions and sects. He noted that any sectarian provocation is an act that goes against Religion, against Humanity and against morals.

The goal of Hezbollah on the long term.
He said that his party does not covet seats by asking for a unity government. He said that his party is ready to give these seats to any other movement in the opposition at the condition that the representation be fair. He said his party does not covet a throne neither a tomb (this an allusion to the political assassinations within March 14th) but a national unity government. he criticised the actual government as a government supported by the 'royal' courts of Bush and Olmert, rather than being a sunni government and that if this government was really a sunni government he would not oppose it.
(Nasrallah is criticising here the political maneuvres of the actual government which is asking the backing of traditional sunni states such as Egypt, Jordan and saudi Arabia, and sunni oulémas inside Lebanon, by appearing as sunni).
He called on Arab states for the creation of an Islamic or Arab judiciary council appointed to inquire on the legal aspects of the late Israeli agression on Lebanon in order and on the present sectarian agitation some are resorting to. He condemned those who (in Lebanon) encouraged and even pushed Bush and Cheney to launch a savage war on a Hezbollah resistance they could not disarm. He specified that those who encouraged the latest israeli agression on Lebanon are in the actual government and asked that they be tried for treason. He specified that he was not accusing all March 14th politicains but those who, being part of this March 14th coalition, sat on the same table as Bush and Cheney and asked them to initiate a war on Lebanon. He said that he was not going to name names and wishes he will may be obliged to do so in front of the international community. He also accuses Israel of opening a prison camp with a 10 000 men capacity in anticipation of the imprisonment of members of the actual Lebanese opposition.

Message to Sanyura: If you come to us we will forgive and we are determined in our demands and our forgiveness .
Hezbollah's leader adressed Sanyura knowing that he might be listening from his Prime Ministerial residence surrounded by the protests. He sermoned him for issuing an order to the Lebanese army to block ammunitions transfer to the resistance in the south while this resistance was battling the ennemy and defending the country. he asked how a Prime Minister of a country in war could try to block a resistance that even savage Israeli bombardments were not able to deter ? He however declared that he comes from a culture inclined to forgive and attached to Human values and tolerance and because of that he forgives his lebanese brothers who deviantly wanted to harm the resistance and who recently permitted a supposedly sunni terrorist network to infiltrate Lebanon with the goal of assassinating him.

He invited Sanyura to accept a national unity government and he warned that if Sanyura continues to oppose a unity government a time will come when the opposition wil withdraw the proposal in favor of a pure resignation of Sanyura's government. In which case, those who will lead the new government must allow Sanyura or anybody else who will be in the opposition a blocking majority because the promise of a fair and balanced government will be maintained. Lebanon being a country built on consensus, all political forces must be represented in the new cabinet.

Shias, Sunnis and Christians united in their faith for one God.
Nasrallah invited those who believe in the same God to aprticipate in a prayer Friday December 8th and asked shiites protesters to pray with sunnis at 11th instead of their usual prayer performed at 12.

He also called Lebanese to participate Sunday, 3 p.m., in a planned meet-up to renew and reaffirm the will of the December 1st protest not to bow to a government manipulated by foreign forces.

He concluded by promising victory to Lebanese from all confessions and parties and hailed the spirit of the protest victim and of all the protesters.

Angry Arab's analysis of the speech.

Google video of the speech (Arabic)

Addendum: I am listening now to the speech and I think what Libnanews missed is the harsh indictment of the Bush administration on Iraq asking how could Sanyura's government trust the people who ignited a civil war in Iraq and killed its children. He also ridiculed the Sanyura government by telling that this government can boast about having been the subject of a special meeting of the Israeli cabinet (who does such meetings only when the interests of Israel are at stake) with the goal of finding solutions to help Sanyura !
This is why I keep telling that we should leave the anti-Syria, pro-Syria characterisations of the present forces in lebanon and adopt the pro-USrael and anti-USrael categorisations.
Nasrallah praised also the neutrality of the Lebanese army but criticised the internal security forces controlled by the government and invited them to act in neutrality. He mentioned also attempts from the government at intimidating some sunni Oulémas who support the opposition in a clear strategy of mobilisation along sectarian lines.
He also asked : 'Do you want a government who takes his orders from amabassador Feltman or Secretary Rice ?'