Lebanon, Palestine, and the La La Dance

So we take a look at the reactionary camps, things are the same with the camp leaders of 14th and 8th of March. Only difference is that suddenly balloons from our neighbor that "loves" us are falling down and intoxicate our civilians. Peretz the other day announced that he didn't want to retaliate on any missiles launched on Israel because it might stop the shoot out taking place between Hamas and Fatah.

The parallel line between Palestine and Lebanon are almost the same. Lebanon got Bush's favourites in power (although partly though alliance with Hezbollah and AMAL), while in Palestine, Fatah, Bush's favourites, are attempting to send the decisive blows on Hamas. The situation is catastrophic. For starters, Fatah cannot rid itself from Hamas since Hamas (through the Muslim Brotherhood and its networks that have been expanding since 1943) have been providing services to more than 40% through out miniature Palestine. Fatah (ironically dubbed as terrorists back in the 1970s and 1980s through the PLO) didn't mind giving Hamas the government since they were anticipating the block-out on elections. Bush keeps praising the Seniora government as legitimate while disregards the fact that Hamas were elected democratically. Moreover, Bush keeps attacking Hezbollah as terrorists while ironically Saudi Arabia welcomed two weeks ago a delegation from Hezbollah on State Level and Seniora has kept the Shiite based seats empty till Hezbollah and AMAL return and represent their people (again, Bush seems to neglect that fact to the media).

The headlines in Lebanon and miniature Palestine are the same, dialogues in Lebanon and seize fire in Palestine. There is a massive stalemate between the reactionary camps in both nations. Actually, to be more exact, there is an international support to Seniora and Abbass. Abbass's situation is inverse, he was overwhelmed to see Hamas moving from the military to the bureaucratic muck of politics in order he would become the opposition and attack his rivals as doing a bad job on the executive level (nevertheless they were not given the chance to be tested on the executive part).

Feltman yesterday hoped that the Lebanese choose the dialogue rather the gun, while the Gulf nations intervened more than once to establish "negotiations" between Fatah and Hamas. The demand for national unity government is expressed in both nations while the US's favourites are in inverse situation. Seniora's government is battling to remain in power while inviting Hezbollah's faction to return to the "house of obediance" (as Dr. Traboulsi quotes it) while Abbass's faction is enjoying the thrill of being in the opppsition to burn Hamas. The problem is that neither nation state government till now and in the long run can replace Hezbollah's or the Muslim Brotherhood's (Social Dimension of Hamas) services.

In Paris III, a new direction was reflected. The International Community want to win Hezbollah's audience by spending extensive projects into Hezbollah's stronghold area, but they still got a long road to go. Funding to Lebanon is unstable if the government of Seniora collapses. We can see a cut-off in the fundings and financing to Lebanon as happened when Salim el Huss became a Prime Minister in 1998 (with the gulf massively tightening the grip) and as Hamas was isolated (for a stronger reason as in under the accusation of being a terrorist group). Bush administration seems to have failed to go publicly saying that the highest number of civilians killed are due to Israel's brutality (at this rate the United States in few couple of years will hit rank one due to the blood bath striking the Proletariat in Iraq, and Bush demanded extra funding of 100 million dollars to continue with the bloodshed).

Every day we read the same headlines in Palestine, Lebanon, and to a certain extent, the more sad news, Iraq. In Lebanon and Palestine, confrontations took place between both reactionary camps (with Palestine breaking to temprary civil wars to the pleasure of the Zionists) that left dead civilians wondering by. Bush administration has destablized the region to a bloodier zone, and of course Bush wouldn't think to topple down the Baathi regime in Syria for three major reasons. The first includes the reality of the great business deals and oil deals between the United Kingdom and Damascus. The second reason is keeping Syria on standby to enter Iraq as a blockage or peaceful force between the Sunnis and the Shiites (whereby Iran can influence the Shiites). The third reason, and primary reason, is the fact that if the Baathis are ousted away from the government, the Islamic Brotherhood are the next option since Syria weakened the other secular forces, such as the Syrian Social Nationalist Party and the Syrian Communist Party factions.

A new Middle East is being carved out, a bloody Middle East is being carved out, and no one knows where this Middle East is heading but definitely not towards Democracy as the United States administration's allies are not happy about such logos, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

To a unified Proletariat and to hell with all politicians.

MFL