You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
U.S., France Discuss U.N. Resolution on Lebanon
2004-08-31
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and France are weighing a U.N. Security Council resolution seeking to curb Syrian influence in Lebanon, whose pro-Syrian president wants to stay beyond his six-year term, a U.S. official said on Monday.

Lebanon's cabinet on Saturday agreed to a plan to extend President Emile Lahoud's term by three years, an act that would require amending the country's constitution and be welcomed by Syria, Lebanon's main power-broker. The proposal has been denounced by Lahoud's opponents and even some allies of Syria in Lebanon, where Damascus poured troops in the 1975-1990 civil war, afterwards consolidating broad sway in the presidency, army and security services.
Being a conquered state really sucks, eh?
"We are discussing with the French a possible resolution of the Security Council that would stand up for Lebanon's right to decide its own fate without outside interference," a senior State Department official who asked not to be told reporters.
Yes, the French certainly can make the Syrians listen.
The cabinet meeting came after Lebanese leaders, including Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, met Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over the matter of the presidency, in which lawmakers said Syrian officials made it clear they backed Lahoud's bid.

Critics and backers of the proposal link its fate to Syria's foreign relations, particularly with the United States, which wants Damascus to cut support for Lebanon's Hizbollah guerrillas and pull its troops out of Lebanon.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs William Burns might visit Damascus and raise the issue as part of a tentatively planned Sept. 8-16 trip to Cairo, Jerusalem and London, where he intends to meet Libyan officials.

The Lebanese cabinet's agreement on extending Lahoud's term would have to be sent to parliament, which picks the president, and where a two-thirds majority can change the constitution. "We have heard a lot of voices in Lebanon standing up for the established constitution. And we think the Lebanese people should be allowed to decide without influence from other parties," said State Department spokesman Richard Boucher.
Time to form a "Popular Front for the Liberation of Lebanon?"
Posted by:Steve White

#3  Long and the short of it is: China will veto anything that reflects badly on their position in Tibet.
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-08-31 3:53:19 PM  

#2  the syrian position in Lebanon is technically within international law, as they were actually invited in at one point by the Lebanese govt, who saw them as an alternative force to the PLO - they came in to help the Christian Lebanese. Of course they overstayed their welcome, switched sides, and ended up propping up only pro-Syrian govts. And outlasting Israel, the US, and even Iraq (which briefly supported a christian rebel in an anti-Syrian move)

The international community more or less accepted this, as long as it seemed necessary to do so for Lebanese reconstruction to get underway. Better than civil war. An agreement was signed (the Taif agreement) whereby Syria would eventually withdraw. Syria has of course ignored this. With Lebanon essentially back on its feet the Syrian presence is more rawly colonial, and changing the Leb constitution to keep in place one of the few pro-Syrian christian pols with any legitimacy is a pretty blatant act. In this situation the US feels it has leverage to push the UNSC to act.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-08-31 10:29:58 AM  

#1  Must be ok to be occupied by muslims though as I've not been hearing much about roadside bombs, assasinations and drive-by mortar barages.
Posted by: Lucky   2004-08-31 1:04:03 AM  

00:00