Prime Minister Saad Hariri said ‘no’ to a vote on the issue of false witnesses during Wednesday’s cabinet session. (AFP/ Ramzi Haidar)
Prime Minister Saad Hariri has had a rough time of it recently. Not only has he had to cope with the veiled threats of an opposition hell bent on bringing down his government and pushing Lebanon in a cozier corner of the Iranian-Syrian fold, he has had to face harsh criticism from his own supporters, many of whom have been disillusioned by his seemingly comfy relations with Damascus, his apparent absolution of the Syrian regime in his father’s murder and his apparent lack of focus in the day-to-day running of national affairs.
But cometh the hour, cometh the man, and at Wednesday night’s cabinet meeting at which the matter of the so-called false witnesses was debated, Hariri didn’t blink. He said ‘no’ to a vote on the subject because he knew that transferring the issue of the false witnesses to the Judicial Council would be the thin end of a very big wedge by conceding that the investigative process of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) was potentially flawed. In not doing so, he sent a very clear signal that the government, or at least part of it, was foursquare behind the tribunal. In short, he did what he had to do.
In such a climate of rumor, conspiracy, accusation and the manipulation of the facts, it was essential Hariri adopt a global, statesmanlike vision on the matter. Otherwise, we might get pulled into a madcap scenario such as that suggested by Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, who, immediately following the cabinet meeting, declared that the opposition wanted to know “who induced the false witnesses and financed them, and then we will know who is behind the assassination of Former PM [Rafik] Hariri.”
Does Aoun really think it’s that easy? Does he honestly believe that by simply referring those who have been questioned by the UN investigators and whose testimonies may or may not have been taken into consideration – for we still don’t know – to the Judicial Council, that the Lebanese judiciary will be able to uncover in a matter of weeks a process that the UN has spend over five years attempting to unravel?
Aoun’s rhetoric beggars all belief. In the same statement, he said that “the opposition’s reaction until now has been political, but the premier has hostile intentions.” As usual, one can only speculate what Aoun really means, but the key words in this sentence are “political” and “hostile.” Surely when it comes to the STL, the hallmarks of the opposition tactics have been the cynical maneuverings to discredit and ultimately destroy the STL, and the continuous threats to bring down the government and/or stage another attack, armed or otherwise, on the offices of state, such as we saw in November 2006 and May 2008.
And yet now Aoun claims that because PM Saad Hariri did not bend to the will of the opposition, that he didn’t “do a Jumblatt,” that within his premiership there still remains some vestiges of the March 14 ideology that since 2005 has won him two parliamentary elections (and two votes of confidence by the majority of the Lebanese people), that he still believes bringing to justice those who in the space of three years picked off seven politicians, one political activist and two security figures, not to mention dozens of innocent civilians, that Hariri is being “hostile.” Three other words, “pot,” “kettle” and “black,” also spring to mind.
But it does not end there. We have Hezbollah’s statement: “We denounce... attempts to halt the process of uncovering who was behind these witnesses, who were fabricated to destabilize Lebanon and harm Lebanon's relations with Syria.” Fabrication is something Hezbollah knows a lot about, given the laughable “evidence” it presented to the Lebanese people in its bid to implicate Israel in the Rafik Hariri killing.
The truth of the matter is that we know nothing of the judicial process. Those who truly have Lebanon’s interests at heart must allow the STL to do its job and go about seeking justice for all Lebanese. Hariri knows this, and at yesterday’s meeting, his unflinching leadership is keeping the quest for justice on track.
But cometh the hour, cometh the man, and at Wednesday night’s cabinet meeting at which the matter of the so-called false witnesses was debated, Hariri didn’t blink. He said ‘no’ to a vote on the subject because he knew that transferring the issue of the false witnesses to the Judicial Council would be the thin end of a very big wedge by conceding that the investigative process of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) was potentially flawed. In not doing so, he sent a very clear signal that the government, or at least part of it, was foursquare behind the tribunal. In short, he did what he had to do.
In such a climate of rumor, conspiracy, accusation and the manipulation of the facts, it was essential Hariri adopt a global, statesmanlike vision on the matter. Otherwise, we might get pulled into a madcap scenario such as that suggested by Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun, who, immediately following the cabinet meeting, declared that the opposition wanted to know “who induced the false witnesses and financed them, and then we will know who is behind the assassination of Former PM [Rafik] Hariri.”
Does Aoun really think it’s that easy? Does he honestly believe that by simply referring those who have been questioned by the UN investigators and whose testimonies may or may not have been taken into consideration – for we still don’t know – to the Judicial Council, that the Lebanese judiciary will be able to uncover in a matter of weeks a process that the UN has spend over five years attempting to unravel?
Aoun’s rhetoric beggars all belief. In the same statement, he said that “the opposition’s reaction until now has been political, but the premier has hostile intentions.” As usual, one can only speculate what Aoun really means, but the key words in this sentence are “political” and “hostile.” Surely when it comes to the STL, the hallmarks of the opposition tactics have been the cynical maneuverings to discredit and ultimately destroy the STL, and the continuous threats to bring down the government and/or stage another attack, armed or otherwise, on the offices of state, such as we saw in November 2006 and May 2008.
And yet now Aoun claims that because PM Saad Hariri did not bend to the will of the opposition, that he didn’t “do a Jumblatt,” that within his premiership there still remains some vestiges of the March 14 ideology that since 2005 has won him two parliamentary elections (and two votes of confidence by the majority of the Lebanese people), that he still believes bringing to justice those who in the space of three years picked off seven politicians, one political activist and two security figures, not to mention dozens of innocent civilians, that Hariri is being “hostile.” Three other words, “pot,” “kettle” and “black,” also spring to mind.
But it does not end there. We have Hezbollah’s statement: “We denounce... attempts to halt the process of uncovering who was behind these witnesses, who were fabricated to destabilize Lebanon and harm Lebanon's relations with Syria.” Fabrication is something Hezbollah knows a lot about, given the laughable “evidence” it presented to the Lebanese people in its bid to implicate Israel in the Rafik Hariri killing.
The truth of the matter is that we know nothing of the judicial process. Those who truly have Lebanon’s interests at heart must allow the STL to do its job and go about seeking justice for all Lebanese. Hariri knows this, and at yesterday’s meeting, his unflinching leadership is keeping the quest for justice on track.
No comments:
Post a Comment