by Hasan Abu Nimah

Syria has just ended its military and intelligence presence in Lebanon. This, no doubt, is a step in the right direction. It will enable Lebanon to continue to build its political institutions and its struggling economy away from the direct influence of foreign intervention.

A prosperous, democratic and healthy Lebanon is a substantial contribution to renovating the entire region after extended periods of war, political stagnation and regional strife. But by completely fulfilling its obligations under Security Council Resolution 1559, will Syria be free from further international pressure? It is unlikely.

Syria was not an occupier of Lebanon although the extended stay of its military forces and the expansion of its political influence, beyond the expiry of the circumstances which necessitated Syrian military intervention three decades ago, made it look like one. But Syria has been targeted for other reasons.

The war on Iraq was the first stage in a comprehensive plan for the region. Syria was meant to be next, once the Iraq issue was settled and Saddam's regime was removed. Secretary of State Colin Powell wasted no time after the Iraq operation was "officially" over, heading for Damascus with a long list of demands, which the Syrians accepted. They agreed to curb the activities of the Palestinian opposition factions and to offer intelligence cooperation, while stopping former Iraqi officials from seeking refuge in their territory. They also agreed to monitor their border with Iraq to block infiltration of "terrorists" and they made several overtures to start unconditional peace talks with Israel.

by Marc Gopin

Washington DC - In between speaking at two seminars in Israel regarding the future of peace and conflict in the region, I slipped out of the country into Jordan and then on to Syria. The trip was the brainchild of Hind Kabawat, a Syrian/Canadian attorney who I had met at the World Economic Forum. She planned with me an unprecedented set of engagements in Damascus raising publicly for the first time in forty years the subject of peace in the Middle East.

We raised these issues through the lens of culture and religion, a less threatening approach than pure political discourse, and, most importantly, I would raise these issues as a scholar of conflict resolution with a cultural background as a religious American Jewish scholar. Hind displayed a combination of intense national pride, commitment to peace, political savvy and public relations know-how that really should be studied as a textbook example of how to open up political dialogue across civilizations when it has been closed for generations.

by Musa Keilani

The decision by the pro-Syrian politicians in Lebanon to reject Omar Karameh's move to resign as prime minister after failing to convince the opposition to form a national unity government shows that they are not willing to accept realities.

The Syrian domination of Lebanon is in its final moments and the sooner Damascus and its allies in Beirut accept that, the better for the future of the embattled country, especially in the aftermath of the Feb. 14 killing of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Their manoeuvrings to retain power have little chance of success if the game is played on a level field, such is the intensity of pressure that is being applied at all levels and in all aspects by the US and Israel from behind the scenes.

Obviously, the pro-Syrian camp has realised that it stands little chance of assuming power through the ballot box if elections are held in May. Their only hope to remain in a position of influence is to have their own man in charge in the run-up to the elections. They know that if they let go now, the person who would take charge would belong to the alliance representing Hariri supporters, the Druze community led by Walid Jumblatt and the Maronites led by Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir.

by Michael Jansen

The withdrawal of Syrian troops and intelligence agents from Lebanon, due to be completed well before the parliamentary poll scheduled for May, will not effect a divorce of the two countries or extricate Syria from Lebanon's or Lebanon from Syria's politico-economic affairs. The two countries, artificially partitioned by France nearly a century ago, remain closely connected by a multiplicity of familial, political and economic ties which have never been severed in spite of the efforts of right-wing Maronite Christian elements who want nothing to do with Sunni Muslim majority Syria and are not prepared to admit that Lebanon has been more dependent on Syria than Syria on Lebanon.

Since Lebanon is bordered by Syria on three sides, Lebanese produce and manufactured goods as well as foreign goods in transit to the Arab hinterland have always passed through Syria. Syrian construction and agricultural labourers have been working in Lebanon for decades. Seven Syrian workers were employed in the construction of my house built in the Lebanese mountain village of Chemlan in 1968; the only local Lebanese who contributed were an ironmonger, a stone mason and a carpenter, all skilled professionals. Today, even these skilled workers may be Syrians.

Indeed, it can be said that before the 1975-90 civil conflict, Lebanon was built by Syrian labour and since the war ended, Lebanon is being rebuilt by Syrian labour. Syrian merchants have always deposited funds in Lebanese banks and done business with their Lebanese counterparts. Both cheap and quality Syrian goods have continually flowed into the souqs of Beirut, Tripoli and Sidon, while Syrian inlay furniture upholstered with Damascus brocade continues to grace the apartments and homes of grand Lebanese families. Lebanese and Syrians have intermarried at all levels of society.

by George S. Hishmeh

The call by President George W. Bush, supported by some of his new-found friends in Europe, for an end to Syrian occupation of Lebanon, as much as necessary, has opened a can of worms.

What about a similar call for the end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, now in its 37th year, an issue that has the full endorsement of the United Nations in its famed and probably forgotten resolutions 242 and 338? Or for that matter, an end to American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq?

Equally, the threats voiced against Iran, by the American president while on his fence-mending trip to Europe, for its alleged plans to acquire nuclear capability recalls the deafening silence over Israel's nuclear arsenal which has yet to be subjected to inspection by any international organisation such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In fact, Israel is not even willing to entertain adherence to any arms limitation agreements.

More shocking was US Vice President Dick Cheney's publicly expressed fear that Israel may be compelled to bomb the Iranian nuclear facilities, as it did Iraq's Osirak nuclear installations 25 years ago, an action that is now endorsed by some US officials.

By Naseer H. Aruri

The tragic assassination of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut on Feb. 14 reverberated across the region, evoking vivid memories of Lebanon's 14-year civil war. In itself, the act is a political earthquake whose fallout will have profound local, regional and international implications.

Unlike the days of the civil war, the realignment after Hariri's death now reflects a novel political divide where the fault lines are no longer religious but national. The opposition to the Lahoud/Karameh pro-Syrian government is no longer focused on Maronite centrality; today, the Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir walks hand in hand with Druze leader Walid Jumblat and an undifferentiated slew of Sunni politicians. Druze and Sunnis were, of course, pillars of the Lebanese Nationalist Movement in the 1970s and 80s, which allied itself with the Palestinians against a Syrian/Maronite thrust, united in the need to thwart the emergence of a Lebanese "communist Cuba" on Syria's strategic periphery.

Although the identity of the assassins may never be known, and indeed may prove less important than the consequences, the important questions are: Where will the crime lead, in geopolitical terms; who are the greatest beneficiaries; and what is the likely impact of this heinous crime on the Lebanese political landscape and the regional map? One might even add the global dimension.