MIDDLE EAST:There are fears that Syria, believed to have had a role in the Hariri assassination, could provoke violence in Lebanon, writes Lara Marlowe
The decision by the UN Security Council to establish an international tribunal to prosecute the assassins of the former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri might eventually bring justice, but at the cost of civil peace.
This stark reality permeated comment in the Lebanese press yesterday. "The rope is tightening around the neck of the murderers," Ali Hamadeh wrote in An Nahar, which supports the pro-western government of prime minister Fouad Siniora. But, he warned, the tribunal "may not bring immediate security. It may push those harmed by it to threaten, intimidate and sabotage." Intimidation and sabotage were clear allusions to Damascus, which dominated Lebanon for 29 years until its troops were forced to withdraw in the wake of the massive explosion that killed Hariri and 22 other people on February 14th, 2005.
By placing the tribunal under the aegis of chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which deals with threats to international peace and allows for the use of economic sanctions or military force, Washington and Paris, who lobbied hardest for resolution 1757, ratcheted up fear of violence.
So great is the anxiety over Syria's ability to wreak havoc that Mr Siniora went on television to say: "This tribunal is not directed against anyone, in particular not against sister Syria."
When I last saw Hariri, for an off-the-record interview six weeks before he was assassinated, I asked him whether the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad's, government had attempted to kill Marwan Hamadé, then a leading opposition figure, in October 2004. "At the very least, they let it happen," he said. "At the most, they ordered it." The same assumption is made about Hariri's killing. Nothing on the scale of the St Valentine's Day massacre could occur without Syrian involvement, proponents of the tribunal argue. Hariri confirmed to me that Assad knew he was about to openly join the anti-Syrian opposition.
The UN formed the initial commission of inquiry five days after Hariri's murder. It was headed by Irish Garda Commissioner Peter FitzGerald, who reported that President Assad "threatened both Mr Hariri and [ the Druze leader] Mr Jumblatt with physical harm if they opposed" an extended mandate for the Syrian- appointed Lebanese president Émile Lahoud.
Evidence was removed from the scene of the fatal bombing, and false evidence planted, Mr FitzGerald further reported. The government of Syria was responsible for "the political tension that preceded the assassination", he concluded.
In August 2005 the newly formed Siniora government arrested four suspects, all Lebanese generals who were closely allied with Syria. They have since been imprisoned. Two months later German judge Detlev Mehlis reported evidence of Syrian links to the killings, including the fact that Farouk al-Shara'a, then Syria's foreign minister, had attempted to mislead the commission.
Though Lahoud and Assad were eventually interviewed by the commission, the investigation never seemed to make progress. Saad Hariri, the son of the slain leader, declared the establishment of the tribunal a "historic day" for Lebanon.
Yet the goal of justice remains elusive. No one is sure where the tribunal will be held and it could take at least a year to set up. In the meantime, President Lahoud is attempting to establish a "government of national unity" that could thwart the tribunal's work. And Mr Assad hopes Washington will need Syria's help in Iraq more than it wants justice. Western governments also fear if they destabilise, arrest or convict Mr Assad, Syria could be sucked into Iraq-like chaos.