Ahmadinejad does not bother innovating to break the routine. Indeed, the dossier of the “American-Zionist scenario” is ready in his desk's drawer and it would be enough for him to take it out and paste the names of the opposition leaders and the hundreds of thousands of those who took to the streets to demand change with their blood to relieve his conscience from the burden of discussing their demands, even if in form. For his part, a representative of Khamanei simply demanded their execution to spare both efforts and time and avoid trials and a media coverage which could expose the real criminals. As for Hezbollah, it does not bother thinking about the reasons which made more than half of the Lebanese population reject the continuity of its arms and its security zones, headed by the Christians of the majority. It thus hurriedly reminded the latter of the lessons of May 7 and the fate of the Christians of Iraq, after casting boring accusations related to the wager on America and Israel. Between Tehran and the Southern suburb of Beirut, there is a thick line of ideas, money and arms. There is also one mentality, one school and one method, that of accusing those who dare attack the opposition of treason and of marginalizing those who surrender or build alliances. What made the situation in Iran concern us more than it should - considering it is a foreign country - is the fact that Tehran has infiltrated the details and privacies of many Arab states, at the head of which is Lebanon that engaged in a war on its behalf in 2006, and Iraq that is experiencing the occupation of parts of its territories and whose officials believe it is linked to their possible request for the re-negotiation of the Algeria Accord between the Shah and Saddam, in which the latter offered geographic concessions in exchange for Iran's disregarding of his oppression of the Kurds. However, what concerns us even more is the fact that Sayyed Nasrallah compared the Christians in Lebanon to those in Iraq, which forced some to wonder whether or not he made a mistake after he appeared as though he was recognizing Iran's responsibility for the targeting of the Christians of Iraq “whom America was unable to protect,” without pointing to the side in the face of which they required protection. It was as though he were corroborating the fact that Iran's strategy of submission was the same in all the places it could reach, knowing that many Iraqi circles assured that the Iranian-inclined Mahdi Army was the first to launch a campaign against the Christians in Basra and Baghdad. As for the second mistake committed by Nasrallah, it was his attempt to isolate the Christians in Lebanon and distance them from the overall national dimension carried by the positions of their leaders toward the legitimacy of his arms, as well as their instigation against one another under claims that the problem was now theirs and that it required concord between them. In other words, he said that the Christian parties should either abstain from attacking the state of the fait accompli which he is running, especially in light of the constitutional appeal filed by the Phalange Party to challenge the recognition of the resistance as an independent entity from the state and inside of the state in the Cabinet statement, or he will repeat the experience of the “Sunni” Beirut which he occupied by armed force. However, what Hezbollah missed is that such attempts that were seen in the near past to isolate the Christians due to their demands to control the spread of Palestinian arms inside and outside of the camps, to uphold the sovereignty of the state and keep the peace and war decision in its hands, all failed with the recognition of those who were carrying them out. Therefore, the repetition of this approach toward the Christians would mean that the party does not care about its alliance with one of their leaders. If the Christians of the majority understood the positions of the leader of the Sunni sect, Saad al-Hariri, at the level of the renewed relations with Syria in their wider regional context and his reliance on a flexible formulation for the statement of the national unity government, thid does not imply that they should accept all its articles and recant key positions which are supported by the majority of the Lebanese.
