the human province

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.

Last night, after going to the cinema and having some dinner in Sassine with my roommate, we decided to go check out what was going on at our local Aounist headquarters. While we were having our dinner and 'arguileh, supporters of Hariri's Sunni-based Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangist party kept driving by honking their horns and waving party flags. Sassine, which is mostly Christian and next to the ABC Achrifieh mall is mostly for Geagea and Gemayel. This is why we decided that it would be interesting to go see what was happening in the Aoun camp.

The headquarters were blocked off by the Army to prevent any political street fighting. I was given an orange Free Patriotic Movement t-shirt and a bottle of water with an orange cap, as well as a cup of coffee, which was about the only non-orange thing there. Everyone was outside watching the results on Orange TV, the FPM's unofficial television channel. There were more orange wigs, shirts, shoes, socks and pants than at a faculty meeting at an American elementary school on Halloween.

The Parliamentary by-election in the Metn region was called by the government (and opposed by the opposition, which makes Aoun's participation contradictory if perhaps also cunning) in order to replace MP Pierre Gemayel, who was assassinated earlier this year. The election is an important one, since it acts as a bellwether for Christian support, which will be helpful for predicting who the next president will be. Former president and father of Pierre, Amin Gemayel ran against Aoun-backed and lesser-known Kamil Khoury.

Orange TV announced Khoury's victory relatively early in the evening, but it wasn't until this morning that I saw more definitive accounts of the results. When Orange TV made the call, the Aounists immediately started cheering, with more than a few heaving a large sigh of relief. Large and loud fireworks soon followed, at which point I took my leave. As I was leaving the headquarters, the Aounists told me that I should put the t-shirt they gave me in a bag, fearing that I might get harassed on my back home since the neighborhood was so fiercely pro-government.

According to CNN, the Ministry of the Interior officially called Khoury the winner by 418 votes in an election with some 80,000 ballots cast. In every account I've read so far, it seems that the deciding vote was what LBC is calling "the Armenian Voice." No one I talked to last night could tell me how many votes had been cast so far, but everyone could quote how many Armenian votes their side had received. As is usual in Lebanon, allegations of voter fraud are coming from both sides, and as is also usual, they're both probably right.

The run-up to this election has been interesting to me, because it's been marked by two very anti-democratic forces. On the one hand, the only reason the election is happening at all is because there was a political assassination. On the other hand, supporters of the Gemayel family and the Phalangist and Lebanese Forces parties have had a a worrisome attitude of entitlement about the whole affair. According to many of them, the Parliament seat belongs to the Gemayel clan, and it's just bad form for Aoun to contest it. Others, including Michael Young and the Maronite Patriarch, have been arguing (undemocratically, I needn't add) that Gemayel should run unopposed, because a real election would split the Christians (as if they weren't already split).

In any case, one thing that seems certain is that this has put the last nail in the Gemayel clan's coffin. If the former president couldn't beat a little-known Khoury, then the Gemayels have finally gone the way of the Chamoun clan. Overall, I think it's a good thing when a political dynasty ends in a country like Lebanon (by non-violent means, that is), but if Lebanese history is much of an indicator, the political (and physical) death of a clan doesn't necessarily imply the fall of feudal politics, but rather the rise of another political clan in this country of the Godfather where things are run by various tribes with flags.

Dick Cheney's eldest daughter, Liz, has a piece in the Post today about why the US shouldn't talk to Syria. She makes a point of listing the anti-Syrian Lebanese who have been killed in the last few years.

It is time to face facts. Talking to the Syrians emboldens and rewards them at the expense of America and our allies in the Middle East. It hasn't and won't change their behavior. They are an outlaw regime and should be isolated. Members of Congress and State Department officials should stop visiting Damascus. Arab leaders should stop receiving Bashar al-Assad. The U.N. Security Council should adopt a Chapter VII resolution mandating the establishment of an international tribunal for the Hariri murder.

The Security Council should also hold Syria accountable for its ongoing violations of existing resolutions. The U.S. government should implement all remaining elements of the Syria Accountability Act and launch an aggressive effort to empower the Syrian opposition. European governments should demonstrate that they value justice over profit and impose financial and travel sanctions on Syria's leaders.

...Conducting diplomacy with the regime in Damascus while they kill Lebanese democrats is not only irresponsible, it is shameful.

While Syria has been blamed for many of the assassinations in Lebanon, it seems unfair for a former member of the State Department to blame Syria before the investigations are finished or a tribunal has been held. Furthermore, her care for the Lebanese people seems suspect, given the current administration's stalling last summer that bought Israel more time to continue its pummeling of Lebanon. (In case anyone thought that it wasn't on purpose, Bolton has told us that not only did the US do its best to prevent an earlier cease-fire, but that he was "damned proud of what we did.")

Furthermore, it seems silly that Liz Cheney's criticism be leveled at Pelosi, whereas she remains silent about Republican Congressmen who visited Damascus the day before.

Finally, while I'm not going to go either way on Syrian involvement in the killing of Hariri, Kassir, Hawi and Tueni, I will say that it is not at all clear who killed Pierre Gemayel, so her remarks that Syria did it are disingenuous, unless of course, she's keeping some secret evidence of Damascus's involvement from the rest of us.

It just so happens that shortly after Gemayel's assassination, I spoke to Antoine Richa, the late Gemayel's advisor. He told me that his party, the Kataeb, didn't know who killed Gemayel. He mentioned that most of the people assassinated lately had been anti-Syria, but if Gemayel's advisor, part of the Kataeb's rank and file isn't sure that Damascus did it, what makes Cheney so sure?

Finally, all that is beside the point. Even if Syria is responsible for all the recent political assassinations in Lebanon, that's one reason more to engage in diplomacy with Assad. Given that the prospects of regime change in Damascus are currently slim-to-none, doesn't it seem wiser to try to change Syrian behavior through diplomacy rather than ignoring the regime and thus continuing the status quo?

Robert Malley's recent piece in the LA Times makes a convincing case:

If, as Israeli and U.S. officials assert, the regime's priority is self-preservation, it is unlikely to sponsor militant groups, jeopardize its newfound status, destabilize the region or threaten nascent economic ties for the sake of ideological purity once an agreement has been reached. Israeli and U.S. demands will not be satisfied as preconditions to negotiations, but there is at the very least solid reason to believe that they would be satisfied as part of a final deal.

Even assuming that Washington and Jerusalem are right and that Syria is more interested in the process than in the outcome, what is the downside of testing the sincerity of its intentions? To the contrary, the mere sight of Israeli and Syrian officials sitting side by side would carry dividends, producing ripple effects in a region where popular opinion is moving away from acceptance of the Jewish state's right to exist, and putting Syrian allies that oppose a negotiated settlement in an awkward position. It has gone largely unnoticed, but Assad has been at pains to differentiate his position from that of his Iranian ally, emphasizing that Syria's goal is to live in peace with Israel, not to wipe it off the face of the Earth. That is a distinction worth exploiting, not ignoring.

Rigidly rebuffing Syria is a mistake fast on its way to becoming a missed opportunity. The U.S. says it wants to see real change from Damascus, and it takes pleasure in faulting visitors -- Pelosi only the latest among them -- for returning empty-handed. Syria's response is that it will continue to assist militant groups, maintain close ties to Iran and let the U.S. flounder in Iraq for as long as Washington maintains its hostile policy and blocks peace talks. It also could change all of the above should the U.S. change its stance. That's a message Pelosi can hear and one she can deliver, but not one she can do much about. Rather than engage in political theatrics, the president should listen.

I couldn't agree more. Usually, the online comment section on American newspapers is full of support for attacking Arab countries and rigid support for Israel. Strangely, the comment section for this piece is less than kind to Dick's daughter, calling into question her credentials for having filled the newly-created post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. And true enough, a comparison of her bio and that of that of her boss, one might indeed be forgiven for wondering if her last name had anything to do with her appointment. But that would be nepotism, and we all know that the current administration is above that.