Hezbollah seizes control in west Beirut

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Jan 31, 2008
2,764
3,360
113
44
#1


BEIRUT: Heavily armed Hezbollah fighters seized control of large parts of west Beirut on Friday, patrolling the deserted streets in a show of force that underscored the Shiite militia's refusal to back down in its escalating confrontation with the American-backed government.

Hezbollah allies also forced a government-allied satellite television station off the air and burned the offices of its newspaper affiliate, as Sunni fighters loyal to the government largely melted away, outnumbered and outgunned, during a third day of armed clashes here.

Those humiliating blows made clearer than ever the power of Hezbollah and its allies, which have links with Iran and Syria, over the government majority in the political stalemate that has crippled Lebanon for 17 months.

By Friday afternoon, Hezbollah fighters and paramilitaries were riding joyfully through west Beirut in trucks and cars and on scooters, shouting and firing weapons into the air in a victory celebration.

The government majority issued an urgent appeal for help from other nations Friday evening, calling Hezbollah's actions an "armed coup" on Lebanon and its democratic system using "weapons sent by Tehran."

The gun battles of the past three days have pitted Sunni Muslims against Shiites, with Lebanon's divided Christians - including Michel Aoun, the former general who is allied with Hezbollah - sitting out the conflict. The clashes appeared to be exacerbating sectarian tensions between Muslims here, in an ominous echo of the civil conflict in Iraq.

The Lebanese Army - the one institution viewed as neutral in the country's bitter political struggle - has stood by during the clashes, unwilling to take sides. Hezbollah and its allies handed control of some government offices to the army on Friday after commandeering them, hoping to avoid being seen as a conquering force.

Three days of street battles here have left at least 11 people dead and 20 wounded, after the government majority provoked a confrontation Tuesday by challenging Hezbollah's telecommunications network.

It was unclear what the developments would mean for Lebanon's political future. For now, they seemed only to lead to stalemate and a deepening of the country's troubles. For 17 months, Lebanon has had a political crisis between the Hezbollah-led opposition and the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, who is backed by the West and Saudi Arabia. The standoff has left the country without a president since November.

The clashes began Wednesday, a day after the government decided to take steps against Hezbollah's telephone network. Lebanese officials consider the network a violation of the country's sovereignty. The fighting escalated Thursday, after Hezbollah's leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, said the government's decision was "a declaration of war."

But he said Hezbollah would back down if the Sunni forces left the streets and the government reversed its decision on the telephone network.

After Nasrallah's speech, Saad Hariri, leader of the anti-Syrian majority in Parliament, proposed a deal to end the fighting and called the government's decision a misunderstanding.

Hariri said any move on the network should be left up to the army command, and he urged the immediate election of the army commander, General Michel Suleiman, as president and the convening of a national dialogue among the rival factions.

Al Manar television, which is run by Hezbollah, said Thursday night that the group had rejected Hariri's proposal. The station cited a pro-Hezbollah official, who said the group and its allies would reject any ideas for ending the conflict that were not proposed by Nasrallah.

Still, on Friday, the Shiite militias began to open up roads that had been blocked since a general strike began Tuesday, including allowing cars through to the airport, and seemed to be waiting for the government to reverse its decision on the telephone network.

Hezbollah has previously rejected proposals for electing a president before there is an agreement on a new cabinet and a new election law.

"The government's proposal did not offer anything new on how to solve the political crisis," said Talal Atrissi, a political sociology professor at the Lebanese University. "So one of the scenarios would be to continue fighting until either the government publicly backs off or the opposition agrees to hold dialogue."

Hariri, a Sunni, also urged Hezbollah to lift what he called its siege of Beirut.

"My appeal to you and to myself as well, the appeal of all Lebanon, is to stop the slide toward civil war, to stop the language of arms and lawlessness," Hariri said in a televised speech.

Nasrallah, speaking at a news conference via a video link, said the telephone network, which connects Hezbollah's officials, military commanders and emplacements, was a vital part of the group's military infrastructure.

"We have said before that we will cut the hands that will target the weapons of the resistance," he said. "Today is the day to fulfill this promise."

The government's decision, he added, "is first of all a declaration of war and the launching of war by the government against the resistance and its weapons for the benefit of America and Israel."

Minutes after Nasrallah's speech, armed men in mixed Sunni-Shiite neighborhoods on the west side of Beirut engaged in heavy fighting using automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades. The army raced in armored personnel carriers from one neighborhood to another, with soldiers shooting in the air to try to stop the fighting.

By late Thursday, masked gunmen were roaming the streets with walkie-talkies. Some were seen shooting out streetlights to keep rooftop snipers from directing their fire.

Many residents along Corniche Mazraa, a major highway that has become a demarcation line between the factions, were seen leaving their houses for safer areas. Others lined up in supermarkets, stocking up on food supplies.

Several parts of the city were shut down, and roads were blocked by burning tires and garbage cans set on fire.

Fighting also broke out in the Bekaa Valley, to the east, where government and Hezbollah supporters blocked roads and exchanged gunfire.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#2
This article is from yesterday but full of good information

:::::::::::::
:::::::::::::

Lebanon on brink of civil war
By Chris Marsden
9 May 2008




Lebanon stands on the brink of all-out civil war. A general strike by the leading trade union to protest rising prices and demand an increase in the minimum wage has led to armed conflict between the pro-Western Sunni and Druze-based government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and the Shia-based Hezbollah and its ally, Amal.

For the past two days, the conflict has constantly escalated. On Wednesday, supporters of the Hezbollah-led opposition blocked roads in the capital Beirut. About a dozen people were injured in stone-throwing by rival pro- and anti-government gangs of young men.

On Thursday, Sunnis and Shiites exchanged gunfire in the village of Saadnayel in the eastern Bekaa Valley—a crossroads linking the Hezbollah stronghold of Baalbek with central Lebanon and Beirut.

Supporters of Hezbollah have blocked the road to the country’s only airport, closing it. Burning tyres and earth blockades have been erected, paralysing the capital city.

Heavy fighting broke out in the al-Mazraa district of West Beirut between Sunni and Shia fighters. Opposition gunmen used rocket-propelled grenades to destroy an office belonging to the pro-government Future Movement. Its weapons and ammunition were seized.

The army was deployed in key thoroughfares and crossroads dividing Beirut from the Shia-dominated suburbs in the south. Troops in riot gear stood between rival stone-throwing youths in the mixed Sunni-Shia Mazraa district.

Lebanon’s army command has warned that a “continuation of the situation... harms the unity of the military establishment.”

The conflict brings to a head a 17-month stand-off between the US- and Saudi-backed government and Hezbollah, which has the support of Iran and Syria. Lebanon’s presidential election has been postponed 18 times. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has designated May 13 as the date for the next attempt to elect a new president after this month’s failure to secure a compromise by Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa.

The ruling March 14 group, though appearing as the victim of an offensive by Hezbollah, has, in fact, been working for months towards an open conflict with the Hezbollah-led March 8 Alliance, which also includes the Christian Free Patriotic Movement of Michel Aoun. It has done so in collaboration with the United States and Israel, both of which have made clear their intention to resume hostilities against Hezbollah, and threatened Syria and Iran.

Lebanon has long been the focal point of a regional contest between the US and its allies—Israel, Saudi Arabia and France—and Syria, Iran and their local allies, Hezbollah and Amal. Washington has repeatedly blocked any compromise with Hezbollah because it wants Lebanon to function as its protectorate and as an extension of its main power base in Israel. This would, in turn, be a precursor to possible regime change in Syria and Iran to establish US hegemony in the oil-rich region.

Israeli forces withdrew from Lebanon in 2000. But Israel made clear its continued designs on the country when, targeting Hezbollah, it declared war against Lebanon in July 2006, during which more than 1,200 people were killed, many more were injured and vast swathes of the country’s infrastructure were destroyed.

Israel’s inability to defeat Hezbollah created a major political crisis in Jerusalem, while winning Hezbollah further popular support amongst the Shia masses.

Since that time, the US has been anxious to create a pretext for conflict with Hezbollah, Syria and, ultimately, Iran, blocking tentative peace talks between Israel and Syria and mounting repeated provocations against both Damascus and Tehran. Last September, Israeli warplanes bombed Syria, with unnamed US sources claiming that the target was a partly-constructed nuclear reactor.

On February 28, the USS Cole was stationed off Lebanon’s coast, joined later by the Nassau battle group, which includes six vessels, including amphibious landing craft, and a contingent of over 2,000 Marines. A top US official declared at the time, “The United States believes a show of support is important for regional stability. We are very concerned about the situation in Lebanon. It has dragged on very long.”

That same month, the Bush administration announced a further round of sanctions against Syria, directed at unnamed individuals alleged to have played a role in supporting the resistance in Iraq.

On April 24, the Bush administration released intelligence claiming to prove that Damascus was building a nuclear reactor, with the assistance of North Korea, at the site targeted by Israel’s air force last year. A White House statement ominously warned that Syria’s alleged covert construction of the reactor was “a dangerous and potentially destabilising development for the region and the world.”

The US justification for Israel’s earlier bombing paves the way for similar measures to be undertaken. The allegations also chime with the repeated accusations that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program.

For its part, following on from its September 2007 air raid, Israel assassinated senior Hezbollah leader Imad Mughniyah in Damascus on February 12 of this year, an action widely seen as aimed at provoking retaliation and providing the pretext for another Israeli war in Lebanon.

On May 8, amidst the escalating conflict in Lebanon, President George Bush said he was again extending for one year US sanctions against Syria, using the charge that it was trying to secretly build a nuclear reactor. The sanctions include a freezing of Syrian assets and an embargo on several imported goods. Bush accused Damascus of supporting terror, continuing its interference in Lebanon and Iraq, and attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction and missile programs.

The provocative actions of the Siniora government against Hezbollah can only be viewed as an extension of this US/Israeli-led offensive. In a televised February 10 speech, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt threatened Hezbollah: “You want disorder? It will be welcomed. You want war? It will be welcomed. We have no problem with weapons, no problem with missiles. We will bring them to you.”

Last week two moves were made towards doing just that.

At the weekend, Jumblatt accused Hezbollah of monitoring Beirut International Airport with security cameras in preparation for a possible attack or kidnapping. On Tuesday, the government ordered the commander of security at the airport, Brigadier General Wafiq Shuqeir, to return to the Army Command, accusing him of sympathising with Hezbollah and failing to deal with the secret camera it allegedly set up overlooking the main runway.

Shuqeir is close to Nabih Berri, the parliamentary speaker and leader of Hezbollah’s coalition partner, Amal. It is this action that prompted the barricading of roads to the airport.

In the same speech, Jumblatt also accused Hezbollah of setting up its own private telecommunications network to eavesdrop on calls made in Lebanon. This was followed on Tuesday by a government declaration that Hezbollah’s telephone network was “illegal and unconstitutional” and a threat to state security, referring a dossier on the issue to the judiciary.

Targeting the network was bound to illicit a strenuous response. Hezbollah does indeed operate an extensive fixed-line telecommunications network.

According to Time-CNN, “Hizballah had some time ago installed its own, in-house dedicated fiber-optic telephone network, connecting its headquarters in the southern suburbs of Beirut to its offices, military posts and cadres as far south as the Israeli border. During the summer 2006 war, Israel had jammed cell phone signals throughout south Lebanon and monitored the Lebanese telephone system, but Hizballah’s internal communications channels had survived thanks to its private fiber-optic system.

“Since the war, however, Hizballah has expanded the network to cover its new military frontline north of the United Nations-patrolled southern border district, and into the Bekaa Valley to the east. Part of the system incorporates a WiMAX network allowing long-distance wireless access for the Internet and cell phones.

“More recently, Hizballah has dug trenches for fiber-optic cables in the mainly Christian and Druze Mount Lebanon district and in north Lebanon, according to Marwan Hamade, the Lebanese minister of telecommunications.”

An attack on this network would severely curtail Hezbollah’s ability to defend itself from Israeli aggression or from an attack by its internal opponents. The provocation had the desired effect. On Thursday, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah gave his first press conference since 2006, stating that the decision to close down the organisation’s private telecommunications network was a “declaration of war.”

Describing the network as the most important weapon against foreign aggressors, he said, “This decision is first of all a declaration of war and the launching of war by the government... against the resistance and its weapons for the benefit of America and Israel. Whoever declares war against us and who launches a war against us even if he’s our father or brother, or just a political opponent, we have the right to confront him to defend ourselves, to defend our weapons, to defend our resistance and to defend our existence.”

He demanded the government rescind its decision and also reinstate Brig Gen Wafiq Shuqeir.

US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe yesterday demanded that Hezbollah “stop their disruptive activities” and choose whether to be “a terrorist organization or be a political party.”

Bush is scheduled to meet with Siniora at the end of next week at Egypt’s Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh, following his attendance at Israel’s 60th anniversary celebrations and a visit to Saudi Arabia to celebrate 75 years of US relations with the kingdom. For its part, Saudi Arabia has accused unnamed “foreign extremist sides” of fomenting the present conflict.
 
Jul 10, 2002
2,180
18
0
45
#5
^^^Lol

Looks like Hizbollah wants to do for Lebanon what Hamas has done for Gaza (only worse)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1209627061078&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle/ShowFull
If Hizbullah takes over Lebanon and uses it to stage attacks on Israel, Jerusalem would have no compunction about striking at Lebanon's infrastructure, something it was hesitant to do during the Second Lebanon War for fear of toppling the democratic government in Beirut, diplomatic sources said Sunday.


According to the officials, while Hizbullah control of Lebanon would pose enormous challenges for Israel, it would provide opportunities for the IDF in that infrastructure targets considered out of bounds while Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora was in control would suddenly be fair play if Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah were making the decisions.

This assessment came as the cabinet heard security briefings on the rapidly changing situation in Lebanon, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Israel was "naturally monitoring events there."

Vice Premier Haim Ramon told the ministers that "Lebanon must be treated as a Hizbullah state. Everything that happens there is the responsibility of Hizbullah. The country is controlled by this terrorist organization, and its government has become irrelevant."

The idea of an independent government apart from Hizbullah in Lebanon was "entirely fictitious," Ramon said.

OC Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin briefed the cabinet ministers on the recent clashes in Lebanon and said that Israel must prepare for a new situation there.

Although Israel must be realistic about the new situation, he said, "there is no need for hysteria." The fact that Hizbullah was using its arms inside Lebanon, and not "to defend Lebanon against Israel" - its historic excuse for maintaining arms - showed that it felt its position threatened, Yadlin said.

Religious Services Minister Yitzhak Cohen called for an urgent appeal to the UN to renew discussions on Security Council Resolution 1701, which brought an end to the Second Lebanon War. Diplomatic sources, however, said Israel was not involved in diplomacy behind the scenes to convene a Security Council debate on the issue.

Public Security Minister Avi Dichter said that "Hizbullah continues to be in control of Lebanon, without carrying the responsibility of managing the country."

"[They] continue to create problems for Israel, like during the Second Lebanon War, and this prevents us from fighting terrorism," he said.

Defense officials, meanwhile, expressed concern Sunday that the growing instability in Lebanon would lead to a dissolution of the power of the UNIFIL peacekeepers, as well as pave the way for Hizbullah to obtain control of at least a third in the Lebanese cabinet, granting it the power to veto major government decisions.

Israel is concerned that the March 14 group, led by Saad Hariri - son of assassinated former prime minister Rafik Hariri - could lose control of the government to Hizbullah. The Shi'ite group could then shoot down government initiatives, including the upcoming renewal of UNIFIL's mandate to operate in southern Lebanon.

While the IDF - particularly the Northern Command and Military Intelligence - is closely following the events in Lebanon, officials said there was not an immediate concern that the unrest there would include attacks against Israel. The bigger concern was long-term, they said, and involved the possibility that if Hizbullah violently took over the country, Israel would in essence share a border with Iran.

One defense official said the violence in Lebanon was proof that Security Council Resolution 1701 had failed in preventing Hizbullah's military buildup and rehabilitation following the Second Lebanon War.

"Hizbullah's demonstration of its strength over the past few days shows that 1701 was never fully enforced the way it was supposed to be," said the official, who expressed concern that the political instability and violence in Lebanon would lead European countries to reconsider their participation in the UN peacekeeping mission there.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#6
^^^Lol

Looks like Hizbollah wants to do for Lebanon what Hamas has done for Gaza (only worse)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1209627061078&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
If Hizbullah takes over Lebanon and uses it to stage attacks on Israel, Jerusalem would have no compunction about striking at Lebanon's infrastructure, something it was hesitant to do during the Second Lebanon War for fear of toppling the democratic government in Beirut, diplomatic sources said Sunday.

Stopped reading here because the article obviously requires readers to suspend reality, ignore facts, and forget something that happend in the recent past. They blew up every road, bridge, and airport that they could find from the border with Israel all the way up to Beirut cuz they couldn't put a stop to Hezbollah in the last war.

What a joke.

Someone might as well just copy paste an article from the Hezbollah website (if there is one) if we are going totally biased now.
 
Jul 10, 2002
2,180
18
0
45
#8
if the info about israel you're obtaining comes from a british/euro source, it may as well come from a Hamas or Hizbollah website

I post a different perspective contrary to the anti-semetic/israel garbola that all the talking BBC heads post up on here.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#9
A deadly miscalculation in Lebanon
By Sami Moubayed

DAMASCUS - The Lebanese government made a fatal underestimation of how far leaders of the Shi'ite group Hezbollah would go to preserve what they believe are their rights, such as an intelligence network and the freedom to carry weapons.

The result is at least 81 people dead in clashes across the country since violence erupted on May 6; a political and military victory for Hezbollah and Iran and a stinging setback for the government and Saudi Arabia.

The crises was sparked last week in Beirut when the government



of Prime Minister Fouad al-Siniora ordered the communication and surveillance network at Runway 17 of Beirut Airport be dismantled, claiming it was "illegal and unconstitutional".

The decision was taken at a cabinet meeting on May 6 that lasted until 4 am, lobbied for by Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamadeh. The network is one of the primary espionage tools used by Hezbollah in its war against Israel, keeping tabs on comings and goings at Beirut Airport.

Adding insult to injury, the Lebanese government dismissed Wafiq Shuqayr, the Shi'ite security commander of the airport, for planting the system in accordance with Hezbollah's wishes, supposedly behind the back of Siniora.

Hezbollah cried foul, claiming the network had been in place for years, adding that dismantling it was a red line because otherwise Beirut Airport would be "transformed into a base for the the CIA, the FBI and Mossad, referring to American and Israeli intelligence.
Hezbollah secretary general Hasan Nasrallah spoke just hours after the crisis started, saying the communication system and Shuqyar were "red lines" that could not be crossed. He reminded his audience that when Siniora became prime minister in 2005, one of the main points of his political program was "supporting the resistance" and giving it (Hezbollah) a free hand to wage its "war of liberation" against Israel in any way it saw fit.

Veteran Shi'ite cleric Abdul-Amir Qabalan, deputy chairman of the Higher Shi'ite Council, contacted the Lebanese government and advised it to back down, warning that Nasrallah must not be provoked and that he would not stand by and watch his security system being torn down. Qabalan said, "Touching this [communication] system affects our nationalism, integrity and loyalty to the nation."

The government refused to change course, arguing that security must be monopolized by the state and that it was inconceivable that a non-state party like Hezbollah could run a parallel security system at Beirut Airport.

In this stubbornness, the government failed to anticipate the value Hezbollah places on what it believed its key rights. Worse, Defense Minister Elias al-Murr, Interior Minister Hasan al-Sabe and Public Persecutor Said Mirza were tasked to create a team to look into other security violations committed by Hezbollah.

Engineering the escalation was Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, a one-time Nasrallah friend now turned enemy, who knew that within 48 hours the United Nations Security Council was due to discuss resolution 1559, regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah, which has yet to be fully implemented.

Nasrallah angrily replied that "we will cut the arm" of whoever tries to dismantle the arms of Hezbollah, claiming that security networks were weapons, just like missiles and guns. He then reminded that in the past, he would always say that "our weapons will never be used internally", but this time he warned that "weapons will be used to guard weapons".

He was not understating the situation. By the evening of May 7, all hell had broken lose in Beirut.

Hezbollah troops took to the streets of the capital and were confronted by armed men loyal to parliamentary majority leader Saad al-Hariri and Druze leader Jumblatt. Road blocks were set up all over the city, bringing back haunting memories of the 17-year civil war that ended in 1990, and snipers showed up on rooftops.

The Hariri-led March 14 Coalition cried foul, claiming that Hezbollah had launched a coup and taken over the (in the lightening speed of six hours). Parallels were drawn between Hezbollah's behavior in Beirut and the Hamas takeover of Gaza in 2007.

Nasrallah denied a coup was in the making, saying, "Had we wanted a coup, they [government leaders] would have woken up to find themselves in jail, or [thrown) in the sea."

Hezbollah fighters did storm entire neighborhoods of Beirut loyal to Hariri, aided by Amal militiamen loyal to the Shi'ite speaker of parliament, Nabih Berri, an ally of Nasrallah. The poor training and weaponry of the Hariri team was no match for the sophisticated war machine of Hezbollah, which managed to ward off a massive Israeli attack in 2006.

So amateurish were Hariri's men that it almost seemed as if they had no arms at all. They were round up in hours, disarmed and handed over to the Lebanese army. Rather than take control of the districts - to prove that this was not a coup - Hezbollah fighters called up the army, a third party, asking it to take control.
Vandalism did take place, and so did an ugly exchange of words between Hezbollah's team, who are all Shi'ite, and Hariri's men, who are all Sunnis. One of the most telling acts was shutting down all of Hariri's media outlets, which were very active in spreading anti-Hezbollah propaganda, including Future TV, Future News, Orient Radio and Future Newspaper. All of these were taken over by Hezbollah and then handed to the army, yet hoodlums did manage to break into Future TV and set one floor ablaze.

Many saw this as a proxy war between the Saudi Arabia-backed March 14 Coalition and the Iran-backed Hezbollah. Telecommunications Minister Hamadeh said the entire crisis was the doing of Tehran. His boss, Jumblatt, went even further, asking for the expulsion of the Iranian ambassador from Beirut.

Jumblatt's tone changed, however, 48 hours into the confrontation, when the fighting ended in Beirut and shifted to Druze villages overlooking the Lebanese capital. Hezbollah fighters surrounded his palace in Beirut, near the American University of Beirut, but did not invade. It was clear for Jumblatt, one of the United States' main and newfound allies in Lebanon, that it was pointless to resist Hezbollah.

Jumblatt got on the phone with Nabih Berri, the Nasrallah-allied speaker of parliament, and said, "I am a hostage now in my home in Beirut. Tell Sayed Hasan Nasrallah I lost the battle and he wins. So let's sit and talk to reach a compromise. All that I ask is your protection."

Nasrallah and Jumblatt had been good friends and strong allies during the heyday of the Syrian presence in Lebanon. The Druze leader had positioned himself as one of the main protectors of Hezbollah arms throughout the 1990s. A political animal, however, he changed sides when it was clear the Syrians had fallen out with Washington after the Iraq war and he transformed himself into one of the loudest critics of Syrian power in Beirut.

He put his full bet on the Americans, patched up with the George W Bush White House (which he had once accused of staging the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington) and became an aggressive critic of Nasrallah. In his speech on the eve of hostilities, Nasrallah said that the plan to transform Beirut Airport into a base for the US Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Mossad was the brainchild of "the government of Walid Jumblatt".

Intense fighting between Druze forces and Shi'ite militiamen raged on in the villages of Shouf, the towns of Aley and Shuwayfat, raising red sirens throughout Lebanon. This is where heavy fighting had taken place in the civil war - and although the war ended nearly 20 years ago - the wounds have not healed.

Two Hezbollah members were killed in the Druze districts, and another disappeared, prompting Jumblatt to give an urgent press conference, accepting blame for the entire ordeal and calling on his troops to lay down their arms, avoid a sectarian outburst, and transfer order of the districts to the Lebanese army.

Jumblatt added, "I must admit that the Iranians are smart and they knew how to play it in Lebanon. They chose a time when the US is weak in the Middle East and did it."

Calm was restored to Beirut when the government, with as much face-saving as possible, revoked its earlier decisions by transferring the issue of the communication system, and the security commander of Beirut Airport, to the army. Instead of executing the orders Army Commander Michel Suleiman, a neutral third party, declared both null. It is still unclear if the Siniora cabinet will issue a formal apology for its actions, as the Hezbollah-led opposition is requesting.

Regardless, it was a political and military victory for Hezbollah.

The March 14 claims it was a moral victory for itself as well, saying that they had helped prevent a civil war by backing down on their earlier legislation. To date, while fighting continues in the Druze mountains, and has even reached as far north as Tripoli, the government has not resigned. Not even has Interior Minister Hassan al-Sabe, who is a member of March 14.

Rumors circulated in Beirut that Siniora wanted to step down when the fighting was at its peek, but was prevented from doing so by Saudi Arabia. The Saudis, enraged by what was happened in Beirut, realized that Iran - and the Syrians - had taken the upper hand in Beirut.

True, Hezbollah has restored all "occupied" districts to the army, but it is clear they were far superior in power, training, arms and logistics to Saudi Arabia's proxies in Lebanon. Additionally, they have done it once. Nothing prevents them from doing it again at any time the Saudi-backed government tries to dismantle, crush or curb Hezbollah's influence.

When a coup is not a coup
Speaking at the southern village of Bint Jbeil in 2005, Nasrallah once said, "There is talk of disarming the resistance. Any thought of disarming the resistance is pure madness. We do not want to attack anyone. We have never done so. And we will never allow anyone to attack Lebanon. But if anyone, no matter who, even thinks about disarming the resistance, we will fight him like the martyr-seekers in Karbala."

That sums it up. Nasrallah will not allow anybody to touch the arms of Hezbollah and is willing to fight to maintain his status, and that of his party, in the Arab-Israeli conflict. His supporters argue that as a pragmatic leader, and a cunning statesman who excels in psychological warfare, he does not want to rule Beirut.

He is neither interested nor politically able (although it would be easy, in military terms). He realizes that the confessional system of Lebanon is too complicated for such a task, and said it bluntly last Wednesday, "If they told us to come take over, we would say 'no thank you'."

Had he wanted a real coup, he would not have transferred control to the Lebanese army, nor would he have laid down his arms in Beirut. He would have invaded and stormed the homes of Jumblatt and Hariri and arrested both of them, along with Siniora, and set up a new government, to his liking, and to that of Iran. But that is an illogical scenario that would never pass.

What he did last week in Beirut was show his power - flex his muscles - and tell the world, "I am still here. Still in control and still powerful - or as some would say, king - in Lebanese politics."
It was a rude wake-up call to all those who imagined he would never go this far to bring his message to the region and the international community.

Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.