Lebanese Certain Chapter VII Tribunal Will Pass UN Vote End of May

An adviser to to Lebanese Prime Minister Siniora was in New York City on Thursday. A friend explains that according to this adviser, the White House is not happy with Siniora for refusing to sign the chapter VII request. The Lebanese held talks with South Africa, which is a temporary member of the security Council, but not with Qatar because the Lebanese believed it will not vote for a chapter VII resolution in any event. 

According to the advisor, behind the scene negotiations are almost concluded. Chapter VII will be signed by the end of May. Moreover, this adviser has made it clear that Brammertz is ready to divulge much more evidence in his report due in mid-June. The Lebanese government feels that Brammertz has been too stingy with his evidence, claiming that he has the goods on Syria but has chosen not to announce it.

In sum, according to the adviser NOTHING will stop chapter VII. The end of May is the likely date for the Security Council resolution.

Comments (58)

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

51. Ford Prefect said:

Don’t overlook the Saudi connection to the Sunni tribes in Iraq. They have existed as far as history can show. These are strong ties – including blood (family) ties. Also, many Sunnis in Iraq today are finding solice in the anti-Shi3a Salafi/Wahabbi activism (also a look at a map might be helpful).

Further, there are Ba’athists ties to Syria regardless of the ideological differences. This is also a demonstrable and proven fact.

I agree with you on the Sadr and his relative position to Malaki.

All in all, Moubayed’s article was excellent – a far cry from being laughable or sad.

What is truly sad is what Condi Rice is pursuing.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:11 pm


52. MSK said:


I am well aware of the Saudi/Jordanian/Syrian connections to tribes in Iraq. But to write “Saudi Arabia has control of THE tribes” (my emphasis) is plain wrong & Sami Mubayed should know better.

Ditto for the relationship between the Syrian regime & the ex-Ba’thists & Sunni community leaders. Of course there are ties. But to state “Syria has control” is as idiotic as the statement about KSA and the tribes.

Both imply a “control” situation that is simply not there.

And the gaffe about Muqtada al-Sadr & Nuri al-Maliki is one a pre-schooler would make, but not a seasoned MidEast analyst.

All in all – those major mistakes mean that he has no clue about Iraq.

I didn’t criticize anything he wrote about Syria in this article and never called the article as a whole “laughable or sad”. But the part on Iraq is just embarrassingly wrong. HENCE I surmised that maybe SM should stick to Syrian affairs.

And I truly wish you guys would stop trying to drag the US or the Izzies into everything, whether it’s related or not. I don’t think there’s much disagreement about their policies in this group.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:24 pm


53. idaf said:


Iraq aside, I take it that you agree with the rest of Moubayed’s analysis about Syria and Lebanon (which is the main focus of the article)!

Btw, in my opinion, the truth about Syria’s influence in Iraq is somewhere in-between what Sami wrote and your remarks above. Both of you seem to insist on fixed dichotomies of Iraqis in terms of who has influences on tribes, baathis and Sunni community leaders. The truth is that alliances and influence of all players on the Iraqi stage (Sunni, Shiaa, Kurds, Bathis..etc) are divided between Syria, Iran, Saudi, Al-Qaida and the US administration. Syria for example, has considerable influence on MANY tribes, religious figures, baathis, Sunni leaders, Kurds..etc (including Iraq’s president and PM for example). The same is true for Saudi, Iran and the US; each has considerable influence on many others tribes, religious figures, Sunni leaders ..etc. Much of Iraq’s Shiaa community and leaders are closer to Syria than to Iran (as they have the dual identity of being Arab and Shiia, with more emphasis on the former).
Nothing in the Middle East politics is black or white. Alliances are always more complicated than the common dichotomies used by the media, politicians and western academia and of course blogers such as you MSK 🙂

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:25 pm


54. MSK said:


I don’t “do” dichotomies or neo-manichean analyses – fixed or otherwise. So, I’m afraid you’ve misread what I wrote. I’ve learned that life is complicated early on & also in regard to the MidEast.

I do disagree with your assertion that the Syrian regime has considerable influence over the Kurds. Yes, Jalal Talabani used to have a Syrian passport. Big deal … The Kurds are playing their own game & anyone thinking that any outside power has true influence over them is going to have a rude waking up.

As for SM’s analysis of the Syria/Lebanon issue re: Sharm el-Sheikh – no, I don’t think he’s right at all. SM seems to perceive everything in such a way that it looks good for the Syrian regime. I happen to disagree. I think most of SM’s writing is better filed under “wishful thinking”. But I also think that he is not particularly relevant to the situation & thus I just ignore him. 😉

I only made that one remark about his Iraq gaffes because they were just too outrageous.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:33 pm


55. Ford Prefect said:

MSK, if the issue is the use of the word “control” as in being in command of, then I agree with you. No entity – not even Iran – has control of one group or another in Iraq. What we are observing now in Iraq is total anarchy and the bahavior of complex system producing random results. Seems that the only people that are happpy with this kind of results are the neocon nerds and Likud/Kadima.

I would also extend your argument to the relationship between Syria and HA.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:48 pm


56. EHSANI2 said:

Let us suppose that Damascus does have the influence that Sami painted. What is the implication? Is it that the U.S. would be willing to give up its goals in Lebanon to gain favor with Syria over Iraq? Is the suggestion that a quid pro quo deal is in the works here? While this may look good on paper, nothing that I read suggests that this is going to take place.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 3:53 pm


57. K said:


The stupidest part of Moubayed’s worthless article is the part on Lebanon. His portrayal of March 14, the movement’s intentions, methods, and goals, is a pure regurgitation of regime propaganda.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 6:06 pm


58. Ford Prefect said:

K, is the word “regurgitation” taught at the March 14th International School for the Advanced Studies of Syrian Animalistic Orientation (M14-ISASAO)?

It was previously used, exclusively, by another March 14th supporter (where in the world is Gibran?) to a point that it lost its meaning.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

May 8th, 2007, 7:13 pm


Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

Post a comment