During his visit to Lebanon, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan did not carry a special initiative that would lead the country out of the crisis, which has increased the existing paralysis in its constitutional institutions and recently affected the dialogue table between its different components. However, he made sure to corroborate his support of the regional umbrella that is sponsoring calm and stability in this country, i.e. the Saudi-Syrian efforts. He also announced his willingness to communicate with Damascus and Tehran in regard to this issue, a willingness, which is enough on its own, if we were to take into consideration the role played by Ankara in activating the relations between Syria and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on one hand and between Syria and Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri on the other, but also the role that almost succeeded in restoring warmth to Egyptian-Syrian relations. Erdogan's calls on the Lebanese to show unity, solidarity and activate governmental work, as well as his warnings against the undermining of security, echoed positions, which he had announced on the eve of his visit. The most prominent of these positions was probably what he said to colleague As-Safir and his calls for the “destruction of the foundations of the society of fear” due to the expected indictment by International Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare. He clearly stated that he was in favor of waiting to see what the tribunal had to say, assuring: “The prosecutor has not yet revealed the documents, on which he has relied or on which he will rely in his investigations. No information and no final convictions have yet been reached. How can the tribunal have its final say if the prosecutor has not yet put forward his opinion…?” This Turkish view enhances the positions of those rejecting the talk about the return of civil war to Lebanon due to the tribunal or the indictment, and those refusing to link stability to the latter indictment. This was recently reiterated by Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa who said: “The tribunal cannot be used as a pretext for a confrontation inside Lebanon,” warning that the regional repercussions were going to cause Lebanon's destruction and not the tribunal. In reality, the tense situation in Beirut is accompanied by dynamic regional and international actions to enhance the Syrian-Saudi umbrella… The last of these actions was seen in the talks conducted by Prime Minister Al-Hariri in Tehran yesterday and what could be secured by Turkish diplomacy following Erdogan's visit to both Syria and Iran. All of these actions aim at consecrating stability and at preventing the country from heading toward strife or anarchy. Those afraid that Hezbollah might have recourse to a domestic “coup” that would obstruct the effects of the upcoming indictment, expressed their fears in an exaggerated way, just like the party itself blew its threats out of proportion. Therefore, both sides are saying they are awaiting the outcome of the Saudi-Syrian efforts before reaching the abyss. In this context, the party itself talked about giving time to the Riyadh-Damascus understanding, a time, which expired last September without causing the eruption of civil war or the staging of a “coup”! The current situation is still awaiting the consequences of this understanding, to which Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah renewed his commitment in his last speech on the eve of Eid al-Adha, and which today is earning wider regional consideration or support, from Turkey to Iran. Nonetheless, this waiting period is not only linked to the recovery of Saudi Monarch King Abdullah Bin Abdul-Aziz, as though political or diplomatic life in the Kingdom or in any other state stopped because the first leader is ill! It is also linked to the regional developments and to calculations extending far beyond the Lebanese arena, proceeding in parallel to this Syrian-Saudi understanding. Hezbollah has exaggerated and is still exaggerating its threats and warnings against the dangers of seeing its elements accused. It is also excessively warning against domestic strife in case the prosecutor were to issue his indictment and in case the international tribunal were to proceed with its work, thus announcing its refusal to deal with it and menacing those who cooperate with it. However, the party officials know – as any sane person does – that leading the country toward domestic strife will achieve the goals of those whom the party itself is accusing of “politicizing” the tribunal, i.e. the Americans and the Israelis, and will serve those seeking to disfigure its image and that of its arms. In other words, if this coup is actually conducted, Hezbollah would be confirming what is featured in the indictment in regard to these “resisting” arms! Can the party tolerate a reengagement in a battle such as the one, in which it found itself in Burj Abi Haidar last summer, i.e. in a confrontation with a group from a local organization, at a time when it enjoys power and status and represents a strong local and regional figure? The party also knows that getting dragged toward violence might harm the positions of its regional allies, namely Syria and Iran, which perceive the resistance as being a hoist for their regional and international relations, in the face of the project for a new order that is being drawn up for the Middle East. It is also aware of the fact that Sunni-Shiite strife will not only drown Lebanon in anarchy, but will also awaken the demons of confessional conflicts throughout the region, and this is the last thing that Syria, Iran and the people of the region from Turkey to Saudi Arabia want. The party also knows that its full turning around toward the domestic arena will expose the resistance's back to Israel in the South, especially if the army were to decide for example to pull out its units from the South to protect certain positions or figures, or to defuse the conflicts that might erupt here and there. This could encourage Tel Aviv to settle old scores with the resistance, in order to restore the image of its army following the harm caused to it during the July 2006 war. Furthermore, the party knows that no matter how powerful it may be, it would never be able to control Lebanon in its entirety and that even if it were to succeed in doing so, what would it do the next day? How long would it be able to maintain a tight grip over the country? How will it manage it and deal with the outside world and the regional and international calculations, including those of Iran, which previously prevented it from entering the Government House following the famous sit-in in Riad al-Solh Square, but also prevented the fall of the government of Prime Minister Fouad al-Siniora and the decisive settlement of the situation? Consequently, this situation reached a point where the sit-in turned into a burden until the May 7, 2008 events occurred and caused repercussions, from which the resistance and its arms have not yet healed. There is no doubt that what has made and is still making Hezbollah issue these positions, is its concern over the post-indictment phase and the regional and international repercussions it will generate. The issue is not related to the local repercussions, considering that Sayyed Nasrallah has already announced the content of the indictment and has heard what he wanted to hear from his allies and opponents. Therefore, nothing new will be added by the official issuance of the indictment, unless it were to carry surprises. The party and its allies know that the upcoming indictment, whether the tribunal is politicized or not, will constitute a weapon in the hands of its regional and international rivals, in the face of its allies from Iran to Syria. In other words, the United States and those with it among the enemies of the Islamic Republic will use the decision of the prosecutor as a weapon to launch the battle to topple the arms of the resistance, which were considered by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as being the spearhead of the “resistance” by the people of the region in the face of the American and Israeli projects. Washington is well aware of the fact that Iran will have the ability to tilt the traditional balance of power in the region, from the Gulf to the Mediterranean, if it is able to tighten its grip over Lebanon and Iraq, even if it is unable to acquire the nuclear bomb. Therefore, the holders of the wide regional umbrella know that the protection of Lebanon from a new round of violence is neither up to them alone nor up to the Lebanese people themselves, even it seems that Prime Minister Al-Hariri is willing to drink the poison and relinquish the tribunal, and is waiting for someone to help him do so in a calm and non-defiant way. Furthermore, the poles of this umbrella, from Egypt to Turkey and from Saudi Arabia to Syria, going through the Gulf States and Jordan, are seeking common points, which they may never find in light of the wide gap separating their positions and policies in regard to all the files of the region, from Iraq to Palestine going through Lebanon. Consequently, it will be difficult for the Lebanese to reach a stable formula to resolve their conflicts and stop undermining and paralyzing their institutions, amid critical regional circumstances, in which the conflicting sides are trying to draw up the new regional order. Thus, Hezbollah is proceeding with the game of the abyss and the campaign against the tribunal, because it knows that its weapons will definitely be the object of a compromise or a trade-off in the context of the indictment for now, and in the context of the tribunal later on. This “confrontation” or “deal” will be lengthy and complicated, because it is mainly linked to the Iranian file, as well as the roles and sizes - in the New Middle East - of all those concerned by the umbrella, under which Lebanon is currently seeking cover.
