Arab Press: Day of the generals

The ongoing investigation into Al-Hariri's assassination raises more questions than answers, writes Rasha Saad

---

"A major development" is how the arrest of four powerful pro-Syrian Lebanese generals, currently being held by the Lebanese court leading the probe into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri, was described. In the London-based Al-Hayat Ghassan Charbel wrote that the situation "was not normal. It is not a simple matter for the Lebanese to wake up and discover that four generals were brought in one day as suspects in a murder case [even if a verdict has not been passed]."

According to Charbel, it was difficult for Lebanon to live with a situation in which Al-Hariri's assassination will be added to the list of crimes whose executioners were never identified."

Charbel described Al-Hariri as a player who was much bigger than the stage, one of those capable of saving a city or a country. He added that there was a strong link between Al-Hariri's fate and that of his country. Targeting the former was, according to Charbel, targeting the latter as well. "Subsequently, the crime was not ordinary. It was a double crime."

On the day of the generals, as Charbel labels the day of the arrests, "[German Prosecutor Detlev] Mehlis [head of the international probe into the assassination] put forth many worrisome questions requiring difficult decisions at least to contain the damage.

"Will the government of [Prime Minister Fouad] Al-Siniora be able to deal with the mines when getting closer to the truth? Is there any way for co- existence between the president on one hand and the prime minister and the parliamentary majority on the other? What about the Beirut-Damascus road?"

Hazem Saghieh, also in Al-Hayat, posed his own question: who benefited from Al-Hariri's death? Offering a scenario of what would have led to the killing, Saghieh wrote that undoubtedly there was an ideological and political image of Lebanon that clashed with Harirism. The situation was that the latter group controlled the country, marginalising Al-Hariri and what he represented. When international, regional and internal transformations came and it seemed impossible to maintain the status quo, Al-Hariri was killed."

Ahmed Al-Rabei in the Saudi-funded London- based newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat asked, "who would have dared arrest security officials in Lebanon had it not been for the implementation of a Security Council resolution on Al-Hariri and appointed a German judge as its chief investigator? Would Syria have cooperated with that committee so openly if the team were Lebanese? Would Syria have withdrawn from Lebanon if it were not for the international resolutions spearheaded by Washington and Paris?"

What is taking place in Lebanon makes up a fraction of what is really going on, and that we have to revise the term "national independence".

Al-Rabei concluded his article with more questions: Are all these events a blessing or a curse? Do they mark the end of the age of national independence or the beginning of true globalisation that may define new international principles and laws that will be binding on all states? Are we the winners or the losers?

In another article, Al-Rabei demanded that Lahoud resign. "I see no valid reason for him to remain in office. Given the national consensus against his rule, he ought to resign, as he knows his ascension to power was due to Syrian pressure and not a local decision."

"The president should be held responsible for the tragic events that endangered the whole country, killed its intellectuals and threatened the return of the dark days of the civil war."

However, the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi warned particularly against such a reaction. Its editorial backed punishment of the perpetrators if found guilty, it warned that despite the fact that Mehlis did not suspect Lahoud, the arrest of the generals will be used to "settle old scores and rivalries" without any consideration for Lebanon's interests and without any vision for the future.

The editorial admits that "accusing the generals puts Emile Lahoud in a rather awkward situation, and tightens the noose around the Syrian government's neck and some of its security apparatus which coordinated with the generals when Syrian troops were in Lebanon." Explaining Lahoud's dilemma, the editorial said the generals "had direct instructions from the president and are under his authority, so if they were involved in the assassination with his knowledge then he will face detention. If they did it without his knowledge, which is very possible, it means he was a powerless façade."