While the Lebanese prime minister, Saad al-Hariri, met with President Barack Obama on Wednesday, his unity coalition in Beirut was collapsing. Eleven ministers from Hezbollah and its allies, angered by perceived Western interference in a United Nations-backed investigation of ex-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri's assassination in 2005, resigned, wreaking havoc within the government. (The United States allegedly blocked a compromise on the special U.N. tribunal worked out by the Syrian and Saudi Arabian governments.)
The conflict in Lebanon is as much driven by external interests as by internal rivalries for power. TAP spoke to California State University, Stanislaus, Professor As'ad AbuKhalil, who runs a popular but controversial blog, The Angry Arab, on the role of the United States and Saudi Arabia in the collapse of Lebanon's unity government and the likelihood of war.
What role did Obama play in this?
Obama played a big role: Through his assistant secretary of state for Near East, Jeffrey Feltman, who has had years of experience in controlling [the] coalition in cooperation with Saudi Arabia and Israel. It is not a coincidence that Hariri did not get the stomach to reject the compromise deal until he arrived in the U.S.
What else is happening in Lebanon right now that would inspire this action?
The Saudi government is the sponsor of Hariri, and he, or his father, never acted in opposition to House of Saud. In fact, his father broke, privately but not publicly, with Syria only when a rift occurred between Syria and Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family is now undergoing changes, and conflicts over succession are raging, and the return of Prince Bandar indicates that the anti-Syrian princes are gaining the upper hand.
What do you think the opposition wants?
The opposition casts doubts on the entire Hariri tribunal and accuses the U.S. and Israel of manipulating the investigation and the impending indictment. Public opinion surveys in Lebanon indicate that the tribunal is losing support among the public, especially as the target of investigation has been switched a few times.
How important was the breakdown of the Syria-Saudi talks?
The breakdown is quite important but not surprising. Syria and Saudi Arabia are claiming that they have made up and that relations are peaceful, when in reality the Saudi government still finances anti-Syrian opposition forces, especially the Muslim Brotherhood and Rif`at Asad camp.
How accurate do you think the claims that the U.S. blocked a potential deal nearly brokered by the Syrian and Saudi Arabian governments? Why did/would the U.S. do that?
The U.S. did block an agreement, but that was done presumably in cooperation with Israel ... and some factions of the House of Saud did not want an agreement.
What do you think of the implications of President Obama's appointment of Robert Ford as interim ambassador to Syria?
The appointment of an ambassador in Syria is not that important. The Syrian ambassador in D.C. has been talking to officials in the Obama administration prior to this.
How likely does another war in Lebanon seem?
War is not imminent: The Saudi government tried to arm and finance an anti-Hezbollah force, but that lasted for hours in a showdown in 2008. Lebanon may not enter war, but it will be so unstable as to appear always on the verge of war.
This Q&A has been edited and condensed for clarity.
