From bad to better

Doaa El-Bey traces where Palestine and Lebanon are heading

---

While writers expressed their frustration over developments in the Palestinian territories, especially Mahmoud Abbas and Ehud Olmert's meeting, they were cautiously optimistic when analysing the present situation in Lebanon.

The London-based independent political daily Al-Quds wrote that in defiance of all US and Palestinian calls for Israel to stop building more settlements, Tel Aviv declared it would build hundreds of new settlements in Jerusalem.

"Israelis differ on numerous things, but they all agree on carrying on their settlement policy, judaising Jerusalem by building more settlements and imposing a de facto situation on Arab and international parties," the newspaper's editorial read.

The fact that Tel Aviv declared it was building more settlements just days before Olmert's visit to the US showed that Israel was certain Washington would support it.

Nevertheless, Palestinian President Abbas is still willing to negotiate with Olmert in the framework of their scheduled periodic meetings to discuss the achievements of their illusive negotiations as if nothing has happened, the editorial summed up.

Hazem Mubyadein, who regarded the Abbas- Olmert encounter as a farewell meeting, analysed the difficult situation of both leaders. He regarded the meeting as a reflection of Palestinian fears that the present political crisis in Israel would impact negatively on the ongoing negotiations with Israel. It is clear that Abbas is trying to guarantee that any future Israeli government would respect a possible agreement with Olmert.

As for Olmert, he is trying to find in the meetings any cards that would help him in the political and partisan game he might soon lose.

But the meeting came at a time when the gap between the Palestinians and Israelis is widening regarding the core issues.

The peace negotiations witnessed a series of crises that prevented any tangible achievements, and today the difficult Palestinian and Israeli situation adds up to the problem. Thus, meetings between Abbas and Olmert are not likely to achieve any of the expected results. "It would be a mere farewell party between a man who spent his life in quest of peace for his people and another who is seeking to reach an agreement at the end of his political life, but failed to seize the right moment," Mubyadein wrote in the Jordanian political daily Al-Rai.

The Doha agreement was regarded as a major breakthrough by many writers. The Omani daily Oman underlined that the agreement put Lebanon in a quieter and less tense situation from which the fractious parties could reach a compromise.

The editorial wrote that the Doha agreement realised other achievements on the Arab and regional levels as it paved the way for rapprochement between Arab states that differed over the Lebanese issue and other bilateral and regional issues.

"Now that Lebanon is heading towards agreement, after the election of Michel Suleiman, this should be accompanied by a strong and continuous Arab move towards rapprochement and resumption of strong relations between Damascus, Riyadh and Cairo that have always been the fortress of the Arab stand and options," the editorial added.

Edmond Saab expressed his relief that finally Lebanon has a president, life has been restored to parliament and work is in full swing to form the new government.

Lebanon has passed the dangerous crisis that threatened the whole nation and left it on the brink of an abyss. In confrontation of that genuine danger, we had to act in a decisive manner. "Thus the crisis ended with a winner and a loser. The former was the whole of Lebanon and the latter was sectarian strife," Saab wrote in the Lebanese daily An-Nahar .

However, the stability of Lebanon is a challenge for all the parties especially the opposition that demanded to participate in the government and got what it wanted. Thus it should not oppose the selection of Fouad Al-Siniora as head of the government because it may benefit from his present government more than it did from his previous government which it regarded as its enemy.

Ahmed Umrabi agreed with Saab that the Doha agreement was a victory for the opposition because it led to choosing Suleiman, who is accepted by both loyalists and the opposition. The accord responded to the opposition's demand to represent one-third of the government and the right to veto, and made some amendments to the election laws in the interests of Hizbullah and its ally Michel Aoun.

Thus, the opposition could have a strong say in decision-making, something that would not suit US policies in Lebanon which is focussed on Israeli security.

In all cases, the US could not reignite sectarian strife between loyalists and the opposition because most probably they would not allow it after what they had been through, nor will Washington be able to push the new government to disarm Hizbullah as it is part of the present government.

The US would also find it difficult to push the government into agreeing to the international tribunal that is to investigate the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri if the tribunal is likely to pre-condemn Syria and hold it responsible for his assassination, Umrabi wrote in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan.

Elias Harfoush talked to the various parties in Lebanon and satirically told them that after choosing a president the picture had become clear: it is now obvious that their fighting was a mere act in a play to test how loyal their people are. However, Harfoush added that they played their role so well that everybody believed that sectarianism was their real and only motive. However, the turnout of events proved that these parties are far from being driven by sectarianism. Instead, they all showed a real willingness to talk to other groups to prove how secularist they were.

But, the worst thing in the play, according to Harfoush, is that people believed these parties and were willing to fall into a civil war without realising that it was all make believe.

"The scene was repeated more than once. And there is real fear that it could be repeated again. The friendly signs that one sees at present could be a mere interact before the start of the second act of the play. We all know that the opposition still hides guns and knives in its pockets and is ready to show them whenever needed," Harfoush wrote in the London-based daily Al-Hayat.

He concluded by expressing his wish and that of the Lebanese people that if the warring parties are willing to repeat the play anew, they should do this in another theatre because the public is intrinsically kind and would easily believe them again.