Beirut's latest political murder may dampen hopes of US talks with Syria and shockwaves could short-circuit a US drive for a new Middle East with Lebanon as a "crown jewel," analysts said.
While Lebanese Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel's killing will be felt most in the streets of Beirut and Middle Eastern capitals, its impact was already affecting US policy in the region on Tuesday.
An early casualty may be the idea of dialogue with US foes Damascus and Tehran expected to be mooted soon by a commission co-chaired by former secretary of state James Baker probing new strategy for Iraq.
"It is going to be much harder," said Joshua Landis, a Syria expert and co-director of Peace Studies at the University of Oklahoma.
In the wake of Tuesday's murder, US President George W. Bush showed no sign of moderating his tone to preserve a diplomatic opening, accusing Syria and Iran of fomenting "instability and violence" in Lebanon, though stopping short of apportioning direct blame.
Syria's embassy in Washington hit back, saying attempts to pin Gemayel's death on Damascus were a well-worn "charade."
Some analysts saw the killing as the latest step in a bid by the Iran and Syria-backed Shiite Hezbollah militia to topple the US-endorsed government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora.
Others divined an effort by Syria to prevent Siniora's government from endorsing a UN-sanctioned tribunal agreed on Tuesday into the killing last year of the late Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri.
But with many diplomatic signals pointing to a desire by Damascus to go to the table with Washington, why would Syria initiate new tensions?
"I believe the Syrians ... know they will be implicated [by the UN tribunal] at a very high level ... they have to stop this," said David Schenker, senior fellow in Arab politics at the Washington Near East Institute.
Schenker said Syrian outreach to Iran and Iraq in recent days was consistent with past attempts to deflect diplomatic pressure, at a time when the screws were tightening on Syria at the UN.
Analysts also suggested the killing could be the work of rogue factions in Syria or its intelligence services, or even be score settling in Lebanon's fractured political jungle.
If the intent of Gemayel's killers was to halt the Hariri tribunal, it will fail, said Brookings Institution analyst Bilal Saab.
"Regardless whether the Americans are going to talk to the Syrians or the Iranians, the international tribunal is a top priority and there is no turning back on that," he said.
Gemayel's murder meanwhile threatened to sweep Siniora from power and raised fears here planned street demonstrations by Hezbollah could turn out to be the first shots in a new Lebanese civil war.
Even a peaceful collapse of the Siniora government would deal a severe blow to the US democratization agenda in the region, in which the Bush administration has invested significant political prestige.
Lebanon "certainly was the sort of crown jewel in the administration's Middle East portfolio, but they are going to have to regroup," said Schenker, who served Bush as a Pentagon Middle East advisor.
Bilal Saab said the failure of the Siniora government would be a "setback for the Bush administration."
"The Americans believe that this government is capable of advancing US interests -- the flourishing of democracy in the region -- and they see Lebanon an example of democracy taking its way," Saab said.
Landis was more blunt.
"Lebanon is the last success story. If it falls, it is the end," he said.
Bush supporters hailed the parliamentary elections in Lebanon and retreat of Syrian occupiers as a triumph for democracy, and vindication of the president's call for a wave of reform to create a "new" Middle East.
But US-backed elections have brought the radical Islamic Hamas group to power in the Palestinian territories, emboldened radical Muslim groups in Egypt and done little to quell violence in Iraq.
Once again, Lebanon seems to be a proxy battlefield for international political tensions, as it was during the war between Israel and Hezbollah.
"The US is going to use Lebanon as a battering ram," against Syria and Iran, Landis said. Syria meanwhile, "feels the tide is running out on America's imperial authority in the Middle East."
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS