| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"=?utf-8?B?LsK3OirCqMKoKjrCty7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuICDimaUgV29ybGQgV2FyIElJSSAyMDA3IC0tVGhlIExhc3QgMjAwMCBEYXlzIC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuIOKZpcKpwq7ihKI=?=" |
| Date: |
05 Dec 2006 08:55:57 PM |
| Object: |
Iraq & Lebanon, Iran & Syria: What is Next? |
http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3D2&id=3D7226
Iraq & Lebanon, Iran & Syria: What is Next?
03/12/2006
Acts of violence have become a daily occurrence in Iraq as hear about
massacres carried out by one party against another. Violence is the
same regardless of the different parties involved: Sunnis against Shia,
Shia against Sunnis, Kurds against Arabs and Arabs against Kurds, yet
everyone raises slogans bearing the interest of the country and nation
as the bloodshed and destruction continues. In Lebanon there is
continuous and escalating tension between political parties, each with
its own agenda, to the point that we have reached a deadlock, the
outcome of which only God knows whether it will be a new civil war,
conflict between foreign powers on Lebanese soil or a return to the
pre-Taif Accords situation and discussion of cantons. As long as
national accord is absent and as long as there are powers that have
interests in preserving the social or political chaos in Lebanon, all
possibilities are open.
Outside Lebanon and Iraq, there are regional powers that fuel
situations as they begin to subside, as after all, their stability
depends on the instability of others. Iran wants to join the
superpowers club by developing nuclear energy; however, the club is
concerned about an alliance between an antagonistic ideology and
nuclear energy that can annihilate mankind. The issue is not about one
country or another having nuclear energy but is more concerned with who
possesses such energy and can actually use it in regional or
international wars; hence the fear of Iran's neighbors. Iran can only
maintain its nuclear pursuits in a state of regional instability,
particularly instability in its neighboring countries. Therefore, it
becomes clear that the Iranian interest lies in the continuation of
political chaos whether in Iraq or Lebanon, and that there is no
objection to the destabilizing of other countries.
Syria finds itself in a state of international and regional isolation
as it has been subjected to accusations over the assassination of Prime
Minister Rafik al Hariri and other Lebanese figures; and with the
approval of the international tribunal, the Syrian regime in particular
finds itself closer to danger that can only be avoided by increasing
political confusion and chaos in the concerned country, that is
Lebanon, than in any other state. The political breakdown in Lebanon,
and the potential consequences that cannot be predicted, is the last
possible chance for the Syrian regime to save itself. Moreover, any
stability in Iraq would threaten the incumbent regime in Syria, which
is similar, or rather identical, to the former regime of Iraq. The
interest of Syria, or rather of the interest of the political regime in
Syria, is best served by the continuation of the current Iraqi
situation as it creates an absorbent buffer for it, in the sense that
such chaos and instability diminishes pressure on the regime. The case
is the same in Lebanon. The instability in both Lebanon and Iraq is the
winning playing card that allows Iran to maneuver and evade and Syria
to attempt to sustain the regime. Therefore, the Iraqi and Lebanese
issues are a matter of life or death for both parties.
This quick analysis of circumstances in the region may be known to
those who seek an analysis that is void of personal goals and interests
and political ideology. However, it should always be taken into account
because the questions it raises are of utmost importance as we look at
the future of this region and the future of its people. For instance,
where will the conflict in Iraq lead to? The maintaining of this
violent conflict will not end with the withdrawal of US forces, for
example, nor will it end with the monopolization of authority by one
group or another. Moreover, it will not end by the Iranian domination
of Iraq. Iraq is a country that is made up of various ethnicities and
sects; it has always been like that and always will be, and no one
group, however powerful and long-lasting, will be able to subdue all
other groups. Disregarding this fact will only lead Iraq to continuous
violence until every last Iraqi is affected or until the unwanted
partition has taken place. Perhaps the persistence of violent and
horrific acts or partition serves one foreign party or another;
however, this will not serve the interests of the Iraqis themselves,
regardless of the instant gains of this or that party. The same applies
to Lebanon, of which the legitimacy of its existence is based on its
multiple ethnicities and sects, and any attempt to overlook or omit
this fact equates disregarding the Lebanese legitimacy, therefore,
obliterating Lebanon. In that country today, there are those who are
fuelling political conflict out of sectarian and regional interests.
This may serve a foreign party and may serve the interests of
individual groups, but Lebanon will ultimately be the loser because
once pluralistic Lebanon ceases to exist, everybody will eventually
cease to exist.
Is it that the Iraqis and Lebanese =E2=80=93 long experienced with politics
as they are =E2=80=93 are not aware of such matters? This is not the case
inasmuch as the external observer, especially when the interest of the
region as a whole is taken into account, has a more accurate vision.
Those practicing politics and involved in its inferno are often blinded
by a short-lived interests that they seek to gain, or by a political
ideology that captures their minds from within, or by certain
sectarianism that hinders sound vision. Any state, despite its policies
or doctrines, is ultimately concerned with its own interests,
regardless of any bright slogans that are raised. The case should be
the same for Iraq and Lebanon if they are to continue to exist. In
light of the violence in Iraq, and in light of this tension and
escalation in Lebanon, the warlords of both countries should ask
themselves one question that may be the key to everything; what is
next? It is a simple question, the answer to which however is the
answer to everything.=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
