The Syrian regime richly deserves the finger of suspicion now pointed at it but things are pretty murky and I wouldn't jump to any conclusions - especially since the inevitable effect is so obviously to further isolate Syria.

The immediate result looks like a further delay in moving on from rule of the clans and in particular recognition that Shia parties are grossly unrepresented and Maronite Christians grossly overepresented.

There's a lot of pressure for the US to open up towards Syria at the moment and this has certainly come at a convenient time to put a spike in that. But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion it was either the Israelis or the Americans either (especially since major factions in both Israel and the US want such an opening).

As far as anyone actually gaining is concerned it would be Iran, which would prefer to have Hezbollah dependent on it from opposition than becoming an equal partner in government, and which is very nervous of Syria blowing with the wind. Unlike Syria, Iran has nothing to gain and nothing to offer with respect to the current US overtures and no reason to take US bluster seriously.

The enthusiasm with which Hariri started to fan sentiment against the Shia suggests Saudi Arabia might also think it could delay democratic change in the region by destabilizing Lebanon. But both Hariri and the Saudis know that none of the Lehanese factions have any taste for civil war so full destabilization would be a long shot and the stirring looks more like the usual posturing and maneuvering for advantage.

It could just as easily be any disgruntled faction (including Christian rivals for leadership) in the highly tense situation.

Rather than getting sucked in to the speculation I would just stick with the overall position that Lebanon needs to keep moving towards full democracy - which implies a fully representative government in which Hezbolllah would have a much larger share and in which that government would govern the whole of Lebanon.

It is sound advice not to jump to any conclusions - but as Alice said ‘I give myself very good advice but I very seldom follow it.’

Arthur said;

It could just as easily be any disgruntled faction (including Christian rivals for leadership) in the highly tense situation.

True, but whoever ordered the killing or took it upon themselves, the big issue is the fight between the ‘party of god’ and their reasonable demands for greater democracy, and a more proportionate parliament, and the opposition to this. 

The issue has now moved back to the streets and it appears to me that the Shia struggle has changed course, and push is about to come to shove in this country that has just been bombed senseless - but that can’t get agreement to hold a referendum and establish just who is who in a straightforward bourgeois democracy. 

The power sharing agreement that they have had has collapsed after a refusal to move to a more fully proportional representation system of government.  The ‘party of god’ rightly believes that they represent a lot more than others are permitting, and they may have decided to move the issue onto the streets attempting  to resolve it by presumably staying there and bringing the current government undone.  This looks to me like it is a Shia revolution moving to another stage and has to be supported by both the Iranians and the Syrians and their brother parties that now dominate the Government of Iraq. 

The Shia have now (via the walkout) established a position that leaves the government in what they argue, is an unconstitutional position.  They can say that that’s only resolvable by an election or by the ‘Government’ caving in to their demands.  Whatever - they can now hold the view that in the interests of a democratic constitution, they can ignore the government and resort to being the government ‘out of necessity’ in the areas they dominate.  The foreign troops that are charged with assisting the government forces are just not going to get involved in any fight to impose those ‘government’ troops into Shia areas, and the government troops can’t do so even if they wanted to.

Israel will be paralyzed, not be able (nor permitted by the U.S.) to go and bomb a country that has had every target worth bombing already destroyed, with international troops interspersed between the rubble, so the victory of Hezbollah will be seen as complete.

What Lebanon urgently needs having just been destroyed by the Israeli bombing is a government of national unity, and that requires a far more precise reflection of the actual forces that are uniting.  So because that need is obvious the Shia will again win.

‘Since Hariri's death, four other prominent anti-Syrian figures have been killed by unknown assassins: Samir Kassir, a journalist; George Hawi, former Communist party head, Gebran Tueni, member of parliament and newspaper publisher and today, Pierre Gemayel.’

The timing of this latest assassination ought to direct all eyes toward the internal conflict between the pro-Syrian Shia forces principally Hezbollah and their disproportionately represented opponents in the Lebanese government.  

My gut is that the killers are Lebanese and that ‘parties of god’ are not likely to be compliant puppets for anyone.  They may well rely on arms supplies and thus have to pay quite a price, but in the end they have independent requirements, timetables and aims. (as with Israel and the U.S.). 

The assassination, coincides with the UN announcement on the Hariri investigation while Iraq and Syria are simultaneously signing up to formal recognition after 25years (Syria having sided with Iran in the war) and only days after the Shia walked out of the government. 

I can accept that anyone could be responsible.  But the issue that is front and centre is the new Shia struggle for democracy that can’t help but hurt the non democracies of Iran and Syria (in the long run) as their peoples’ look on and see democracy become available to their Iraqi and Lebanese brethren.

Just some random thoughts.

Patrick

It may be just wishful thinking, but I'm rather hoping the "crisis" will be resolved by Hezbollah tacitly accepting the UN Hariri trial that the Syrian regime is desperate to avoid and the other Lebanese factions accepting that proportionate representation for all strengthens Lebanon against Syria rather than weakens it.