Lebanon may be a “message”, but in a region where messages are sent by Katioushas, it could just as well be a battlefield.

So, are we moving towards a civil war in Lebanon? Maybe; it depends on the answer to a series of questions. I will start with the first one:

Are we moving towards a civil war in Lebanon?

The question is not whether the civil war has started; when leaders are killed for political reasons, we have moved beyond civil discourse. The Hariri Assassination was the first shot in a “cloak and dagger” conflict within “Greater Syria”. In this war, Bashar may be swimming against the tide, but “his” Syria will not let go of its prey so easily, and it has powerful local allies.
Syria’s friends, grouped in “March 8th”, have backed “March 14th” into a corner. “March 14th” cannot remain pacific for long, and now has few options but to stick to their bottom line; the tribunal. They are now putting their foot down, “with a little American help”.

With Siniora wearing the unlikely mantle of justicier, without the cape and mask, they are backed by freshly expanded Security Forces and the UNIFIL. But having wasted way too much precious time with Berri’s little show, they now find themselves penalised by their earlier exclusion of Aoun. While it may be true that the “General” is an insufferable egomaniac, it is also a fact that Saad and Joumblat were too arrogant, as demonstrated by their electoral deal with Amal and Hezbollah.

Syria’s opponents, mostly grouped in “March 14th”, have also manoeuvred “March 8th” into a corner. Whatever the true reason for Hezbollah’s actions, Lebanon’s Shiites do not see many options. Outside the Beqaa Valley, few have seen much of Syria’s brutality, and the most glaring demonstration of Western support came to them in the shape of US-supplied Israeli Jets. Many therefore feel that Hezbollah remains their only guarantee for a place at the table. After all, if “March 14th” would turn against Aoun, wouldn’t they “sell them out” as well? Still, “March 8th” gravely misreads Lebanese mood; aside from the people linked to Bank Al-Madina, few will accept so easily a return to the good old days of sisterly love.

This may extent beyond mere misunderstanding, as exemplified by statements from otherwise perceptive people such as Hussein Khalil, the political adviser to Hassan Nasrallah, who considered that “the government coalition was in an unenviable position and was in a very big impasse [and] needed blood to serve for them as kind of oxygen to give them a new life”.

Many of “March 8th” supporters point out that “the Hariri assassination has demonstrated plainly that no man can be ‘larger’ than his country”. They fail to realise that no single “community can be ‘greater’ than its country”. In Lebanon, anyone who grows to big for is own boots is pulled back in by the other groups, who will find plenty of allies in doing so. Willing or unwillingly, we are all minorities in this country; whoever tries to impose their will on the others faces war.
With assassinations in Lebanon, and suicides in Syria, we are indeed in the middle of a “cloak and dagger”, stealthy war. A new question arises:

Why hasn’t the “real” shooting started?

Indeed, Lebanese “leaders” have been consistently miscalculating us to death, allowing the late Hafez El-Assad to outsmart all of them one by one. That is, until Hariri came along; like him or not, he became a real threat to their hegemony. But he underestimated the brutality of the Syrian regime, and thus met the fate of all its opponents who were not scared enough to get the heck outta Dodge.

In his absence, it is astonishing that our “leaders” have not started their local version of the “OK Corral”. I think that there are two reasons for this; the Aoun-Geagea duo, and the Syrian factor.

First, enter the Aoun-Geagea duo. Few could ever imagine being grateful for them, since they did much to get Lebanon where it is now. But their current feud effectively sidelines the Christians. Without them at the dance, the party may not start so easily. In this regard, the assassination of Pierre Gemayel would have been the spark to start this war. But they underestimated the statesmanship of the victim’s own father, Amine Gemayel, who stood fast and called for calm and prayer, in spite of his tremendous grief.

Second, Syria’s greed is keeping things quiet, for now. With the new US Congress, our sister is hoping for a return to the buffet, in a “Grand Bargain”. As long as it is hoping to get Lebanon back, it will not break it directly. It may hope to spark civil strife by assassinations, demonstrations, but it will shy away from any larger scale confrontation.

Which bring about the next question; are we going to be sold out to Syria, again? To find the answer to that question, we need to “zoom out” to Syria, and ponder another question:
Is Syrian Independent from Iran?

If the answer is “Yes”, then Syria can still “turn” and choose the “Kaddafi option”. A new window of opportunity has opened up for them, since “American realists are making their comeback ”. In that case, we can “Kiss a liberal Middle East Goodbye” for a long time .

The answer, however, is more likely “No”. Syria may have become an Iranian vassal state with little manoeuvring room. Its cash shortfall is dire, and the country may effectively become a net oil importer by 2010. In addition, our bad Lebanese habits may have infected their system beyond repair; the regime has grown fat on Lebanon’s picking during their occupation, and is now durably addicted to easy money. How much will depend of what the Bank Al-Madina files reveal, if and when they are made public.

The regime tried at first to siphon cash from the beleaguered Syrian economy, but found a more reliable source in Iran’s petrodollars. The downside may be that, with Iran’s cash, came a measure of Iranian control. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mahmoud Vaezi set the tone, when he warned the Syrians that Iran’s’ support depended “on what kind of positions Syria will adopt ”. More tellingly, through their close alliance, the Iranians have infiltrated Syria's “Mokhabarat”, like they did Lebanon.

For those reasons, the second possibility is more likely. But the Syrians are smart enough not to move to a direct confrontation, and would try to initiate another “battle of the marionettes ”. Indeed, the assassination of Pierre Gemayel may have been an attempt at sparking another civil war; with Aoun’s increasingly unpopular alliance with Hezbollah, a violent Christian reaction was all but assured. In a re-enactment of the worst days of the civil war, roads were closed with improvised barricades.

The fires of anger were quickly quenched, but one should not expect Syria and Iran to give up so easily. They will push their cause further, increasingly relying on their local alliances, Lebanon’s internal divisions, and the limitations of many of our politicians. Should they prevail, then the only choice the United States is left with “is capitulation, [is which case] Syria could play a pivotal role”. This brings to mind the final question:

Will the United States be “Defeated” by Iran or Syria?

Khamenei promised as much, when the “Faqih” elected to turn Lebanon into a Battlefield. More importantly for the West, the Iranians have long been making confrontational moves, by threatening to close the Persian Gulf, thereby cutting the world’s jugular vein.

But before you chant the “Vietnam” mantra, recall that there was not much oil in Indochina. The United States may have “lost its way” and Israel may be scared , but it is no South Vietnam . And Iran is no Soviet Union.

Whatever the outcome, we Lebanese will ultimately pay the price if the current equation holds; in the Zero-Sum game of Lebanon’s politics, there will be winners and losers. And reworking the formula of 1943 will only ensure another war, or worse; this Levantine bazaar was ill-adapted back then, and would not work now. We need new thinking, something beyond the skills of our current crop of leaders, top graduates of the warlords’ classes of the civil war. Lebanon cannot continue as a nation with so many of its children among the losers, sitting at the side table, hoping for crumbs.

In short, this will not be an easy ride. I am not too reassured when Michel Aoun promises that “it will all have boiled over by New Year’s”; many Europeans, as young as the students he was talking to, were promised much the same back in 1914.

But the ride may be worth it. I am reassured, however, by Amine Gemayel’s stance; coming from a father who had just lost a son, his call to calm and prayer has gone a long to calm passions, and saved us another war. Whatever their fault, many of March 14th leaders, have apparently learned the lessons of the civil war and the occupation.

Visit Jeha's blog: Jeha's Nail