Gemayel killing puts Syria in the spotlight

The brutal assassination of Pierre Gemayel, Lebanon's Industry Minister and a leader of the country's Christian community, has once again put Syria in the spotlight. Damascus has long interfered in Lebanese affairs; it has been a major force for instability in the entire region and has been linked to numerous assassinations in Lebanon.

Just to put everyone in the picture, Pierre Gemayel was the son of former Lebanese President Amin Gemayel, grandson of Pierre Gemayel, founder of the Christian Phalange Party, and the nephew of Bashir Gemayel, who was assassinated soon after being elected President of Lebanon in 1982. The Gemayels are one of Lebanon's most prominent Christian families and have traditionally been anti-Syrian in outlook.

Mr Gemayel was the fifth anti-Syrian figure to be assassinated in the last two years. Former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, journalist Samir Kassir, ex-Communist leader George Hawi and MP Gebran Tueni were all killed last year. May Chidiac, an anti-Syrian television journalist, was the target of an assassination attempt last year. She survived a car bomb, but was seriously wounded and maimed for life.

The international condemnation of this latest killing was swift and many world leaders offered backing for the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. Pope Benedict XVI also condemned the assassination and said: "Faced with the dark forces who are trying to destroy the country, I invite all Lebanese to not let themselves be vanquished by hate but instead to try to re-forge national unity, justice and reconciliation and to work together to build a future of peace."

Syria has never felt comfortable with the pro-Western and anti-Syrian coalition which has dominated the Lebanese government since last year and which came to power in the wake of the murder of Rafik Hariri, when anti-Syrian feelings were running high in the country, and when Syrian forces left Lebanon after a 29-year presence.

To make matters worse for Damascus, last Tuesday the United Nations Security Council backed plans for an international tribunal to prosecute those accused of involvement in previous assassinations in Lebanon, including, naturally, the Hariri killing, something the Syrian government has said it will not co-operate with. In fact, a recent UN report has already implicated Damascus in the Hariri assassination.

The setting up of this tribunal has to be officially approved by the Lebanese Cabinet but this would not be possible if the government collapses, and the recent resignation of six pro-Syrian Shi'ite ministers, including members of Hizbollah, as well as the assassination of Pierre Gemayel, has brought the government close to collapse. If two more ministers go, then the government falls, and plans for the establishment of this tribunal will be put on hold, meaning that Syria will be off the hook, at least for the moment.

It is therefore perfectly understandable for observers as well as leading Lebanese politicians to point the finger at Damascus for this hideous killing, as Syria has so much to lose if this tribunal goes ahead. It is also true that in Middle East politics anything is possible and that Syria just might not be behind this murder, but I do not think this is the case.

The resignation of the pro-Syrian ministers in Lebanon as well as the murder of Mr Gemayel has created renewed tensions in Lebanon - which already surfaced as a result of Israel's ill-advised military attacks in Lebanon last summer. Lebanon's worst fear is a return to civil war and this latest assassination seems also to have been designed to inflame sectarian tensions at a time when Lebanon was already going through a serious political crisis.

Perhaps Syria is trying to create the feeling that Lebanon is not governable without the patronage of Damascus. However, Amin Gemayel, Pierre's father, repeatedly called for calm after his son's murder, saying vengeance was not the solution.

In simple terms Lebanon is roughly divided into the pro-Syrian and Iranian camp, which mainly consists of the Shi'ites (Hizbollah and its allies) and the pro-Western camp, which consists of the Christians, Sunnis and the Druze. Of course, there are allegiances that cross religious lines, for example a minority of Christians, including the current President, Emile Lahoud, are pro-Syrian. In fact in 2004 the then largely Syrian-controlled Parliament was directed to pass legislation that extended Mr Lahoud's presidential term.

So how should the international community, especially the West, deal with Syria (and Iran) in these circumstances? There is not doubt that both Syria and Iran have been boosted by recent events in the Middle East. With the almost hopeless situation in Iraq, the United States and Britain are considering talking to Damascus and Tehran with a view to try and create some sort of stability in the country.

Furthermore, with Hizbollah, backed by Iran and Syria, standing its ground against Israel's onslaught last summer, both countries, as well as the Shi'ite movement, have been politically strengthened. It is also a fact that excessive American support for Israel has undermined the pre-Western Lebanese government led by Fouad Siniora.

While it is clear that Syria and Iran have to be engaged by the West for an overall Middle East peace settlement, it is important that Lebanon's sovereignty, independence and government continue to be supported. The UN tribunal on assassinations should go ahead and it should be made very clear to Syria and Iran what the consequences would be of their continual meddling in Lebanese affairs. Of course, all this should be accompanied by a fairer approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as well as not supporting Israel in everything it does, such as its attacks on Lebanon last summer.