Lebanese blues

The Syrian-Lebanese agreement to establish full diplomatic ties was cautiously welcomed this week, reads Doaa El-Bey

---

Lebanese President Michel Suleiman's visit to Damascus was regarded by some commentators as an important step to build long lasting full diplomatic relations for the first time since the two states gained independence from France over 60 years ago. Elias Harfoush wrote that the establishment of Syrian Lebanese relations is like the reunion of a husband and wife after a long separation. They returned to one another after each of them failed to find another suitable partner.

Harfoush added that optimists regarded this reunion as a good opportunity because for the first time there is a marriage contract that organised relations and outlined the responsibilities and rights of each party. "In order for the relation to be on equal footing, past differences should be thoroughly discussed in the hope of over-passing them. But if both parties feel that they are forced to re-establish their relation as a result of an illusive victory, this will be the way for an imminent deterioration of the relation," he wrote in the London- based independent political daily Al-Hayat.

Bassem Al-Jesr warned that the Syrian acceptance to establish full relations with Lebanon raised a few questions like: why didn't Syria take that decision earlier? Why did Lebanon consider this step a great national achievement, and would establishing a Syrian embassy in Beirut change the way Syria treat Lebanon and its people?

He reviewed the history of the relation between the two states since their independence and concluded that it witnessed a number of ups and downs throughout the years. However, he regarded the assassination of Lebanese prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri as a blow to Syrian-Lebanese relations. Ever since then, Syria has openly supported the Lebanese opposition and managed to paralyse the Lebanese constitutional institutions for nearly two years.

Like Harfoush, Al-Jesr was not one of the optimists, as he said the relation between the two states is far from being in a honeymoon. Syria may stop interfering in Lebanese political affairs, but what happens after that depends on the developments in Iraq, Palestine and the new United States policy concerning the Middle East.

Common history and geography, as Al-Jesr argued in the London-based political daily Asharq Al-Awsat, should impose on the two states keeping friendly and brotherly relations. "The Lebanese parties should change the way they deal with Syria and among themselves, whether they belong to the ruling coalition or the opposition," he added.

Mamdouh Taha, who appeared over optimistic, said the meeting between the two presidents is an indication that both leaders and peoples are capable of establishing good relations between them.

It has been widely believed that the Syrian-Lebanese differences were the outcome of an international conspiracy that aimed to punish both states for their cooperation in resisting Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights, their joint support of the Palestinian cause and their rejection of the US pro-Israel policies.

Thus, external parties have always aimed to keep crises in Lebanon and other states in the Middle East unresolved as a pretext for their interference in order to establish their project for a new Middle East. However, he called on both Lebanon and Syria to work hard in order to protect their relations from any relapsing into animosity. "Both Syrian and Lebanese leaders should work to resolve the pending conflicts and close the files of any thorny issues in a fair way according to the will of both peoples," he wrote in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan.

Essam Darry wrote that the Syrian Lebanese summit succeeded in rooting the historic relations between the two states. Darry who is very enthusiastic about the rapprochement between the two states added in the Syrian political daily Tishreen that, "the will of the two people imposed itself. Logic has vanquished all the attempts to drive a wedge in the relation between the two states."

He regarded holding the summit at the second anniversary of the victory of the Lebanese opposition in its war with Israel as an indication that the two states are linked with a historic, strong and distinguished relation.

Ali Hamada who completely disagreed with Darry, wrote in the Lebanese political independent daily An- Nahar that the summit cannot be described as a step towards establishing sound relations between the two states.

Among the issues that stand in the way is the presence of the Syrian Lebanese Supreme Council which is likely to cause duplication between the duties of this council and that of the embassy after the establishment of full diplomatic ties. The other issue that Hamada named was the Syrian decline to discuss the future of Shebaa Farms and a recognition that it is part of Lebanese territory. The issue of the lost Lebanese and those detained in Syrian prisons was also left without discussion. The fourth issue was the presence of some Palestinian organisations that are loyal to the Syrian regime on Lebanese soil. They are spreading chaos in Lebanon because they live outside Palestinian camps and smuggle weapons into Lebanon. All the Lebanese and most of the Palestinians agree that these organisations are destructive and constitute a basic source of destabilisation.