Why Syria Is a Target: The Deception of the 'Cedar Revolution'

A Syrian student holds a sign that reads "Syria announces its non-responsibility for Hurricane Katrina" at a protest in Damascus. (AP)

By Najad Abdul-Aziz

In light of the United Nations report implicating Syria in the death of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri, the stench of American interventionist policy has risen – again.

As German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis hands down the findings, the hate campaign against Syria is at fever pitch, as America and Britain promise accountability.

U.S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the UN should take action against Syria. “This really has to be dealt with,” Rice told BBC News.

“I’m quite sure that when the international community gets together we will decide what to do.”

Strong words, albeit a sense of déjà vu, as the last time the international community got together, UN Charter’s were thrown out the window, and the “coalition of the willing” was formed.

Before this starts sounding like a left wing bashing of American power politics, it may serve the wider population to know of just who benefits from the growing rift between Beirut and Damascus.

First of all, no one disputes the authoritarian rule of the Assad regime. Hafez al-Assad was a mass-murdering maniac. In the tradition of totalitarianism, the death of this dictator resulted in his son’s appointment.

Baathist Syria holds many similarities to Saddam’s Iraq, which is probably why terror suspects are sent to Damascus for “interrogation” or a process euphemistically known as “extraordinary rendition” (i.e. torture)

Repressive regimes are in place all over the world, and yes, many are constructed through American support. So why is Syria targeted?

The nation is now under fire for its occupation of Lebanon. Ironic is the notion of occupation criticised by those who have troops across the border. Nonetheless, it is also interesting to note the Syrian occupation of Lebanon was implicitly approved by the US, as well as Arab states at the time of the Taif Agreement.

US support of Syrian occupation is conveniently swept under the rug, as the masses are now fed a narrative of internal divisions between the Arab states, where the staunch nationalist Hariri paid the ultimate price.

In a mad rush to find answers, the rapidity of the Mehlis investigation is grounds for suspicion. This is because a number of factors are left out regarding the motives of the assassination.

The death of al-Hariri took place at a time where the divisions of power in the country are based on ethnic and religious divides. Furthermore, after the UN Security Council Resolution 1559 put forward by France and America was passed, Lebanon was primarily divided between those in favour of Syrian occupation and those against.
Close friend and ally, French president Jacques Chirac convinced Hariri to join the growing opposition to Syrian troops in his homeland.

Predictably, tensions had grown with Damascus. The stage was now set to portray a scene of diplomatic deterioration between Lebanon and Syria.

Who benefits from this? Israel. Here’s why:
As the Bush administration tries to find “diplomatic means” (does that even hold any meaning anymore?) to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the apparent divide between Lebanon and Syria ultimately demonises the Assad regime, as attention now turns to the Syrian alliance with Hezbollah, which of course is at the front line against Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Syrian affiliation with Hezbollah is of grave concern to Israel. A few days prior to the explosion in Beirut, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom called for the listing and subsequent banning of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. This is mainly attributed to the threat posed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, where they now employ similar military tactics.

The Centre for Research on Globalisation suggests links between the assassination of Hariri and the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, the recent defeat of the pro-Syrian Lebanese government and “the plan to fuel divisive sentiments in Lebanon”.

Also, rather than being independent developments, the Iraq War, the growing tension in Syrian-Lebanese relations, the Israeli call to disarm Hezbollah and the US plan to hit strategic targets in Iran are all interrelated parts of a US-Israeli plan detailed in a policy paper entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing Realm."

Perhaps the most damning allegation of Israeli-American involvement in Syria was put forward by Washington DC based journalist and columnist Wayne Madsen.

He claims there are strong indications the Hariri assassination was carried out by the same intelligence officers used in the 2002 car bombing assassination of Lebanese Christian leader Elie Hobeika, who was prepared to testify against Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in a Brussels human rights court. The case involved Sharon’s role in the 1982 massacre by Israeli troops of Palestinian refugees at the Sabra and Chatilla camps.

Furthermore, as the UN report claims the killing as the work of Syrian intelligence on orders from President Assad, Madsen states a number of Middle-East political observers in Washington who claim Hariri’s assassination was not in the interests of Assad, but that the Bush and Sharon administrations have everything to gain, including Lebanese resistance to Syrian occupation.

For those who don’t buy “official independent reports”, the “Syria did it” school of thought has ultimately suffered a huge blow. Spiritual leader of Hezbollah, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah put it eloquently in a Reuters report:

“The aim of America and Israel is to spread chaos in Lebanon and bring back Lebanon to a state of chaos to find excuses for foreign intervention and to push some Lebanese to call for international intervention.”

It seems the question of who murdered Hariri is lost in the tired call for a “Cedar Revolution”. Investigations are taking place amidst a battle for Lebanon, and as usual, the chief actors are drawn into this proxy war – the Iranians, the Saudis, the Americans and certainly the Israelis.

Strangely enough, the French have actually allied with the US this time.

The “Cedar Revolution” is a Trojan horse wheeled into the middle of Beirut, bearing “gifts” of Western intervention, all in the name of “democracy”.

The dynamic in need of comprehension however, is the role played by Hariri’s assassins, and how conveniently their interests mesh so neatly with the “Cedar Revolutionaries” and their foreign sponsors.

Najad Abdul-Aziz is a journalism student from Melbourne, Australia.