Engaging Reality
The murder of Pierre Gemayel - in broad daylight - in Beirut should be giving the "realists" at least some pause. The barrage of trial balloons hinting that "dialog" with Damascus and Tehran are good things should be strongly questioned right about now. Because it is clear - to all but the Clue Proof™ that Syria had a hand in the latest political murder. Michael Young, writing in the Times of London asks a simple question: How does that engagement idea look now?
In recent weeks the idea that the United States and the UK should “engage” Syria, but also Iran, to stabilise Iraq has been all the rage. On Tuesday, in an east Beirut suburb, Lebanon’s industry minister, Pierre Gemayel, showed what the cost of engagement might be. The scion of a prominent Christian political family was assassinated in broad daylight. This was the latest in a series of killings and bomb attacks that the UN investigator looking into the murder of the late Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri, has determined are linked.
….
Syria has encouraged its powerful Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, to bring down the Government. The recent ministerial resignations were led by the party which has been planning demonstrations to force the Government out.
Developments in Lebanon make the idea of engaging Syria at best premature. The Hariri investigation is continuing, and until the UN releases its final report on the assassination it makes no sense to talk to a Syrian regime that may find itself in the dock. Moreover, its President, Bashar Assad, has implied he would not allow Syrian suspects to appear before the tribunal, making a confrontation between Damascus and the international community likely. Eager partisans of engagement could have egg on their faces.
And maybe that is the best way to present this: it would be an embarrassment verging on humiliation for the "realists" if it turns out that they pushed hard to "engage" a nation that is using cold blooded political murder to advance it's strategy. And that nation got caught, red-handed, by none other than the UN. (Contrary to the opinion of the moral equivalence folks out there, what Syria did here is not the same as a targeted killing of your military enemies. Gemayel did nothing to try to kill Syrians or incite others to do so.). So, how is this idea looking, James Baker?
Willing to risk your reputation on that bet?






