Hezbollah is on an impressive winning streak as of late (last 3 years or so)... Lebanese opposition to withdraw gunmen from Beirut streets http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080510/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hezbollah TV says that Hezbollah-led opposition forces will withdraw all their gunmen from Beirut in compliance with an army request. An opposition statement says the move comes after the army called on gunmen to get off the street and reopen the roads. But the statement said that a "civil disobedience" campaign will continue until its demands are met. Hezbollah gunmen seized most of the capital's Muslim sector Friday in the worst sectarian strife since a 15-year civil war ended nearly two decades ago. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) — The Lebanese army command ordered its troops Saturday to establish security, calling on all parties to withdraw their gunmen from the streets while offering the opposition Hezbollah a compromise. Shiite Hezbollah gunmen seized most of the capital's Muslim sector Friday in the worst sectarian strife since a 15-year civil war ended nearly two decades ago. On Saturday, gunmen stood on the corners of Sunni-dominated neighborhoods though in fewer numbers than the day before. An army statement said that the airport security chief, whose firing precipitated the latest crisis, will be reinstated. The statement also said that Hezbollah's controversial communications network will be put under army supervision instead of being dismantled. The measures are seen as conciliatory to Hezbollah and meet some of their demands. The statement came after Prime Minister Fuad Saniora accused Hezbollah of staging an "armed coup" against Lebanese democracy, and called on the army to restore law and order. In a nationally televised address, Saniora called on the army "to impose security on all, in all areas, deter the gunmen and immediately remove them from the street ... to restore normal life." "Hezbollah must realize that the force of arms will not intimidate us or make us retreat from our position," he said in his first comments since the fighting began. A total of 25 people have been killed and dozens wounded in the recent violence — the worst sectarian bloodshed since the 1978-90 civil war that killed 150,000 people and left Beirut divided along religious lines. On Saturday, a Shiite Muslim shop owner opened fire on a Sunni funeral procession, killing two people and wounding six others in a Sunni neighborhood, police and witnesses said. The shooting underlined the lawlessness that has engulfed the seaside city since Sunni-Shiite violence first erupted four days ago. Iranian-backed Hezbollah gunmen on Friday took over large swaths of western Beirut from Sunnis loyal to Lebanon's U.S.-backed government. Many later pulled back, but tensions remained high between supporters of the Shiite militant Hezbollah and the country's Sunni Muslims. But Hezbollah's show of military power was certain to both strengthen its own political position in Lebanon and deeply worry a Middle East and Western world that are nervous about Iran's growing influence and its intentions in the region. An Associated Press photographer who witnessed Saturday's shooting said the attack came as a procession of 200 people marched toward a cemetery to bury a 24-year-old man killed by a sniper's bullet earlier this week. Two people were killed and six wounded in the shooting, police said. The shooting occurred even though the Lebanese army had positioned armored personnel carriers and jeeps at every intersection. The neighborhood, Tarik Jadideh, was one of the few Sunni areas Shiite militants had not seized Friday because the army had deployed in large numbers. Police said troops later captured the gunman. Neighborhood residents identified him as a Shiite shop owner, who opened fire after the procession passed his store. After the attack, angry residents stormed the shop and set it on fire. The violence has spread to other areas of Lebanon. Police said Saturday that seven people were killed in the mountain town of Aley east of Beirut on Friday. Another civilian died in the clashes in the southern city of Sidon, police said. The army, which has stayed on the sidelines of the political crisis that has paralyzed Lebanon for more than a year, deployed heavy armor and troops to seal off neighborhoods after Hezbollah militants pulled back. Hezbollah seized the Sunni neighborhoods of Beirut after its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, on Thursday accused the U.S.-backed government of "declaring war" on the militant group. Lebanon's Cabinet had sought to rein in Hezbollah by ordering the removal of an airport security chief over alleged ties to militants and demanding the dismantling of the movement's private phone network. Along with seizing neighborhoods, militants also have shut Lebanon's airport by barricading the road leading to it. The seaport also was closed. The Shiite fighters' swift success dramatically empowered the hand of the Hezbollah-led opposition in the bitter political struggle with pro-Western factions over who will guide the country. The rout of government supporters also was a blow for Washington, which has long considered Hezbollah a terrorist group and condemns its ties to Syria and Iran. The Bush administration has been a strong supporter of Saniora's government and its army the last three years.
More... Mountain clashes bring Lebanon death toll to 81 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080512/wl_nm/lebanon_dc_16&printer=1;_ylt=AjlAJ1txDijiIe5i3tKPeWNn.3QA Pro-government Sunni Muslim gunmen and militiamen loyal to Lebanon's Iranian-backed Shi'ite Hezbollah battled with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades in the northern city of Tripoli on Monday. The violence, which broke out when Hezbollah gunmen fought pro-government forces in Beirut last week, is the worst since the end of the 1975-90 civil war in 1990. Security sources said six people were wounded when Sunni government supporters in Tripoli's Bab Tebbaneh district exchanged machine gun and grenade fire with Alawite militiamen allied to Hezbollah in the nearby Jebel Mohsen area. The fighting later gave way to the occasional crack of sniper fire, witnesses said. Iranian-backed Hezbollah and its pro-Syrian allies have swept through Beirut and hills to the east, defeating loyalists of the U.S.-backed government before handing its conquests to the Lebanese army, which has stayed out of the fighting. Hezbollah's success has dealt a severe blow to the ruling Sunni-led coalition headed by Saad al-Hariri, son of the slain former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, in what is widely seen as a proxy confrontation between Iran and the United States. At least 36 people had been killed on Sunday in fighting between Hezbollah and its pro-government Druze opponents east of Beirut. A precarious calm prevailed in Beirut, where politicians prepared to meet Arab League mediators. "What has been happening is negotiations by fire," a political source said. "Now everyone is waiting for the Arab committee to come for the political negotiations to start." One source said the dead in Sunday's battles included 14 Hezbollah fighters. Hezbollah-led forces overran several posts held by gunmen loyal to Walid Jumblatt in the Aley district before the Druze leader agreed to hand them over to the army. Swallowing his pride, Jumblatt had authorized Talal Arsalan, a rival Syrian-backed Druze leader, to mediate with Hezbollah. Arsalan said Jumblatt's men had handed over most of their offices and strongholds in Aley to the army, but said he was still waiting for them to turn in heavy weapons and arms depots. The latest fighting in Lebanon, which began on May 7, has killed 81 people and wounded 250. Britain and Germany, which like Washington strongly support Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's government, issued statements condemning the violence and backing the Arab League mediation. So far Western and Saudi support for the government has done nothing to deter Hezbollah from exposing the military weakness of its foes and changing the balance of power in Lebanon. DEFIANT While Hariri, Jumblatt and their Christian allies have retracted the moves that sparked Hezbollah's ferocious reaction -- outlawing its communications network and sacking the airport security chief -- they have yet to concede political ground. For 18 months, the government has resisted opposition demands for veto rights in cabinet, although Hezbollah has now shown it has the military muscle to veto decisions it dislikes. The political turmoil has paralyzed state institutions and left Lebanon without a president since November. The United States has condemned Hezbollah's onslaught, blaming Iran and Syria for the violence. The destroyer USS Cole passed through the Suez Canal to the Mediterranean on Sunday. The ship deployed off Lebanon in February as a show of support to Siniora's government. A spokesman at the U.S. Navy's Sixth Fleet in Italy confirmed the Cole was operating in the eastern Mediterranean on "a routine deployment." He declined further comment. Some signs of normality returned to the capital, Beirut. But ordinary Lebanese were not confident the lull would last. "We are living on our nerves," Hoda, a housewife, said while stocking up on food. "It's clear the situation is very dangerous and we have to be cautious. Who knows how long this could last?" Lebanese officials said they expected a Qatari-led Arab mission, formed at an emergency meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo on Sunday, to arrive in Beirut on Wednesday. The high-level mission, which both camps in Lebanon have welcomed, is to hold separate talks with rival leaders to broker an immediate end to the violence and direct talks between them. The Arab mediators would also try to tackle the political crisis and secure the election of army commander General Michel Suleiman as president, the officials said. Both sides had agreed on Suleiman as president but could not strike a deal over a new government and a law for next year's parliamentary election. Hezbollah's grab for strategic locations has increased pressure on the government to accept its terms. Opposition sources said the government must annul two of its recent decisions that infuriated Hezbollah and agree to direct talks proposed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, whose Shi'ite Amal gunmen have fought alongside Hezbollah. Then the opposition would halt its campaign and remove street barricades that have paralyzed the capital and kept its air and sea ports closed. Sources close to the ruling coalition said its leaders were waiting for the Arab delegation before making any decisions. The coalition accuses Hezbollah of seeking to restore the influence of neighboring Syria, which was forced to withdraw its troops from Lebanon after Hariri's assassination in 2005. Saudi Ambassador Abdel-Aziz Khojja and members of his family left Lebanon by sea overnight and arrived in Cyprus on Monday. They later flew out of the island.
Coups and counter-coups http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE16Ak03.html Back from the brink, fragile Lebanon can breathe again, thanks to the timely intervention of the Arab League which, no matter how divided and polarized, managed to pull off a big one by convincing the Lebanese government to rescind its controversial decisions that had triggered the latest crisis. This was the removal of the head of Beirut Airport and an assault on a nerve center of the Hezbollah-led resistance, its communication network. So, as the guns begin to fall silent in Beirut, Tripoli and elsewhere in Lebanon and fractious Lebanon and the outside world reflect on what transpired this past several days on the eve of President George W Bush's Middle East trip, it has become fairly obvious that the Saudi Arabia accusation of an Iran-inspired Hezbollah "coup" is a total misnomer. Indeed, the more apt term is a "government coup and Hezbollah's successful counter-coup". This does not sit well with pro-Israel pundits in the US, such as Thomas Friedman, who in his latest commentary titled "New Cold War" in the New York Times, gives the following mischaracterization: The outrage of the week is the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah attempt to take over Lebanon. Hezbollah thugs pushed into Sunni neighborhoods in west Beirut, focusing particular attention on crushing progressive news outlets like Future TV, so Hezbollah's propaganda machine could dominate the airwaves. The Shi'ite militia Hezbollah emerged supposedly to protect Lebanon from Israel. Having done that, it has now turned around and sold Lebanon to Syria and Iran. No mention is made of Hezbollah's allies, such as Amal or the Free Patriotic Movement led by former prime minister Michel Aoun, a leading foe of current Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. Rather, the Cold War reductionism leads people to the Manichean, good guy, bad guy, bifurcation where the "ruthless" Iranians are supposedly winning against the "dumb" America and its "feckless" Sunni Arab allies. Further, a look at the behavior of Arab League delegates in Beirut this week makes it evident that the neat division of "moderates" versus "radicals" simply does not wash. Qatar and Algeria threw their weight behind Syria and openly questioned Saudi Arabia's anti-Iran rush to judgment. Saudi Arabia will now either temper its Washington-style anti-Hezbollah rhetoric or it will find itself increasingly isolated in the Arab world, including among its brethren in the Gulf Cooperation Council, who recognize the Saudi error of prioritizing its criticisms of Hezbollah over its stance on Israel. It is also overlooked that until recently, Saudi Arabia, Iran and France engaged in a collaborative effort over Lebanon, which needs to be resuscitated now irrespective of their differences. Iran has just submitted its vision of security cooperation to resolve regional and global crises, and the West would be remiss to ignore Tehran's commitments and not to ask for actions to back its words. The use of "new cold war" terminology is a verbal surrogate, or rather subterfuge, for Israel to befriend conservative Arab states with respect to the regional strategic environment, thus bypassing the core issue of Palestinian rights. But, again, it is conveniently overlooked that about 60 years of Arab-Israeli cold war has been punctuated with periodic hot wars. One can't deny that there is a burgeoning US-Iran power game in the Middle East, but in light of the sheer size of shared or parallel interests between them - in Iraq, in Afghanistan against Taliban, al-Qaeda, energy insecurity - the appellation "cold war" tends to obfuscate the complex, mixed-motive games of strategy between the two sides, compared with the relatively straightforward superpower rivalry during the Cold War. So if the "new cold war" is not exactly a replica of the old Cold War, then by definition the transition out of it, or away from it, looks different as well. For one thing, it could mean exploring and finding new points of coinciding interests, for example in Iraq, through meaningful security dialogue, which is a lot more promising than a simple case of "confidence-building" measures Cold-War-style. And co-management of regional crises, by the US and Iran, is not an impossibility, even though a minor "paradigm change" with respect to the US's hegemonic global management would be necessary to make this happen. Here, the US can actually draw a precious lesson from its mini-debacle in Lebanon: blunting and suppressing Iran's "proxy" is not an effective ploy, particularly as it militates against the country's internal balance of forces - that are shaped in part by external influences. Hezbollah's successful "counter-coup" accomplished its principal goal of defeating a concerted effort to deplete its capability and its leadership (with reports of failed plots against Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in the past weeks), and to undermine its credibility. This was to be done by stigmatizing it as an Iranian puppet pure and simple. Capability and credibility are linked, however, and the ferocity of US pundits' Hezbollah-bashing is only indicative of their hidden anger and frustration at the coup that failed. Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) and co-author of "Negotiating Iran's Nuclear Populism", Brown Journal of World Affairs, Volume XII, Issue 2, Summer 2005, with Mustafa Kibaroglu. He also wrote "Keeping Iran's nuclear potential latent", Harvard International Review, and is author of Iran's Nuclear Program: Debating Facts Versus Fiction.
A long but interesting geostrategic analysis of the shifting reality in the Middle East, especially as it pertains to Iran and its role in the whole thing... Saudis, US grapple with Iran challenge http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE17Ak02.html A timeless and abstract passion, which could gain instantaneous contemporaneity and which has proven to be unfailingly useful for statecraft, was invoked in Middle Eastern politics once again this week. It is the ultimate weapon in Saudi Arabia's arsenal of regional diplomacy. It is seductive in its appeal, yet almost embarrassingly direct. That was how, most certainly, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal would have thought when on Tuesday he warned Tehran that its support to what he termed Hezbollah's "coup" in Lebanon would affect Iran's relations with Arab and Islamic countries. The Saudi prince went on to exhort all Middle East countries to respect Lebanon's independence and to refrain from stoking "sectarian tensions" in that country. It is extremely rare for Saudi diplomacy to blatantly use the weapon of sectarianism against Shi'ite Iran and to draw a line of divide between the Persians and the surrounding Sunni Muslim Arab world. More so as Saudi clerics are usually put to use in playing the "Shi'ite card" against Iran. But this time around, if the intention of the vastly experienced, cosmopolitan Saudi prince was to unnerve Tehran, he failed. Tehran coolly ignored the Saudi foreign minister's warning. To make things doubly clear, Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad said dismissively the Saudi prince spoke in "anger". Anger, we know, doesn't go well with good Muslims. Ahmadinejad then proceeded to make a startling revelation that Faisal was not following the "orders" of Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud. Indeed, King Abdullah seemed to quickly dissociate himself from his foreign minister's dire warning to Iran. On Wednesday, the Saudi ambassador in Tehran, Osama bin Ahmad al-Sonosi, called on the chairman of Iran's Expediency Council, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, to hand over a letter from the Saudi monarch containing an invitation to the Iranian cleric leader to visit Riyadh to attend the International Islamic Dialogue Conference. The Saudi ambassador reportedly said, "King Abdullah believes you [Rafsanjani] have a great stature in the Islamic world ... and he has assigned me the duty of inviting you to the conference." Rafsanjani expressed his appreciation for the "special invitation" and bemoaned that "disagreements" in the Islamic world involving both politicians and clerics have alas created an "undesirable situation". He added the conflicts in certain Islamic countries, especially Iraq and Lebanon, had widened the "chasms between Muslims". He expressed the hope the Islamic Dialogue Conference could "moderate the atmosphere and facilitate cooperation between Islamic states". In turn, the Saudi envoy underscored that "through the conference, we [Riyadh] are seeking to promote unity in the Islamic world". Conceivably, the Saudi foreign minister had reason to feel frustrated. The entire Saudi political stratagem in Lebanon has backfired. The Saudi backing for the Foud al-Siniora government's moves to drag Hezbollah into a civil war stands badly exposed. A most awkward detail known to the "Arab street" is that Saudi intelligence and diplomacy was acting hand-in-glove with the United States in the dubious business of emasculating Hezbollah. The ultimate US-Saudi intention was to curtail Hezbollah's dominating stature on Lebanon's political and security landscape. The crisis in Lebanon was proceeded by a barrage of propaganda in the Saudi-supported media aimed at discrediting Hezbollah in Arab opinion and to demolish its profile as Lebanon's resistance movement before disarming it. In fact, Saudi propaganda went into overdrive. To quote the al-Hayat newspaper published from London, "Hamas takes Gaza hostage. Hezbollah takes Beirut hostage. Muqtada al-Sadr threatens Iraq. Al-Qaeda threatens the whole world. Extremist militias and movements suppress peoples and overthrow governments ... the only difference between what the Taliban did in Afghanistan in the 1990s and what Hezbollah did in Lebanon is the time and place." As it turns out, Hezbollah made the Siniora government and its Saudi backers look very foolish. As Israeli military intelligence chief Major General Amos Yadlin put it, Hezbollah proved last week that it is the strongest force in Lebanon - "stronger than the Lebanese army" - and could have seized power if it had wanted to. "Hezbollah did not intend to take control ... If it had wanted to, it could have done it," Yadlin told Ha'aretz newspaper. Equally, the US and the Saudis, in their acute embarrassment, have tried to characterize the dispute as religious. But it was the Siniora government's decisions concerning Hezbollah's communication system and the sacking of the chief of Beirut airport which triggered the confrontation. These decisions were interconnected and had manifestly security-oriented overtones. At any rate, Siniora's government was supposed to confine itself to running the day-to-day affairs until a Lebanese president is elected, but instead it made a strategic decision of countering Hezbollah's expanding influence. (This followed secret visits by the secretary general of the Saudi National Security Council and former intelligence chief and ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, to Beirut.) In retrospect, Hezbollah would seem to have staged a "counter-coup" rather than a "coup". The Saudis have realized there aren't many takers in the Arab world for their anti-Iran, anti-Hezbollah ploys at present. Qatar, Yemen and Algeria have visibly dissociated from the Saudis. Syria continues to firmly align with Iran. Oman, which currently heads the Gulf Cooperation Council, is most disinterested in Saudi Arabia's anti-Iranian stratagems. The deputy to Oman's Sultan, Fahd bin Mahmoud al-Said, paid a successful visit to Iran on April 20. A visit by Oman's Sultan Qaboos to Iran is in the cards. Sensing its growing isolation, Riyadh mounted the latest Arab League mediation in Lebanon on Wednesday. The Arab League meeting itself was scarcely attended. Tehran, however, tactful as ever, has promptly responded to the "softening" of the Saudi stance. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said on Wednesday that if the Arab League delegation led by Qatari Prime Minister (and Foreign Minister) Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani, could reach a comprehensive solution, Iran would support it. Iran stands to gain by being seen as cooperating with a regional peace initiative. Iran's active diplomacy in the past year has proved highly effective when the crunch came, in thwarting repeated US-Saudi attempts to invoke the specter of a "Shi'ite crescent" in the region spearheaded by Tehran. The Lebanon crisis may prove to be a turning point insofar as despite last week's fighting in Lebanon, the broad perception regarding Hezbollah in Arab opinion - that it is the fountainhead of resistance rather than a Shi'ite militia locked in fratricidal strife - remains largely intact. This broad perception cuts across sectarian divides in the Arab world. The supreme leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Mohammed Mahdi Akef, said the Lebanese resistance is the only group that determines what is good for the country while facing the "Zionist-US plot that is penetrating deep into Lebanon". Akef stressed that in the Muslim mind, Hezbollah's image stands unshaken. Similar statements of solidarity have been made by other Sunni Islamic organizations in the Middle East, including in Jordan, despite the Jordanian regime's close alliance with Riyadh. Such solidarity of regional Muslim opinion favoring Hezbollah works to Iran's advantage. The Saudi king's invitation to Rafsanjani to visit Riyadh is a grudging acknowledgement of this political reality. Washington has been desperately keen to transfer the "Lebanon file" to the United Nations Security Council next week. US deputy National Security Advisor Elliott Abrams said in Washington on Tuesday, "We are going to be unrolling a few things in the course of the week, starting perhaps with the Security Council." But it is unlikely the Saudis will want a showdown with Iran over Lebanon at New York at this juncture. The Saudis would assess that the mood in the Middle East region will militate against Riyadh getting involved openly with the George W Bush administration in disarming Hezbollah, whereas the focus ought to be on forging national unity in Lebanon. Nor does Tehran actually seek any confrontation with Riyadh. Time works in its favor. Therefore, we may expect some sort of agreement being worked out involving the Lebanese parties under the auspices of the current Arab League mediatory mission. What is most extraordinary is that all this is playing out on the sidelines of Bush's own visit to the region. As things stand, the Middle East is seething with anger that the Bush administration has dumped the Israel-Palestine "peace process", despite all the hullabaloo at the Annapolis conference in the US last November. In addition, Bush's close identification with Israel profoundly alienates Arab opinion. The Bush administration's overall credibility is also very low, given the Iraq quagmire. Bush is being left in no doubt that the mood in the Middle East is firmly against any US adventurism against Iran. Curiously, Washington seems to anticipate the trust deficit in Riyadh and Cairo, the key Arab capitals that are on Bush's itinerary. No doubt, there is some symbolism in the fact that just ahead of Bush's tour, the US warship USS Cole, which has been deployed in the Persian Gulf since March, crossed the Suez Canal on Sunday en route to the Mediterranean. Again, in a well-timed statement on Wednesday, even as Bush arrived in the Middle East, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates spoke at two different forums in Washington about the imperatives of the US engaging Iran. Gates virtually shut the door on a military option against Iran, saying, "There is no doubt that ... we would be very hard-pressed to fight another major conventional war right now." Gates said, "We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage ... and then sit down and talk with them [Iran]. If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us." In yet another venue on Wednesday, Gates amplified, "My personal view would be we ought to look for ways outside of government to open up the channels and get more of a flow of people back and forth ... We ought to increase the flow the other way [of Americans visiting Iran]." What it adds up to is that the Bush administration realizes that it is left with hardly any choice other than resorting to "Track II" diplomacy with Tehran. The Iranians are no more taking the lame-duck administration in Washington seriously. They know the Bush administration stands widely discredited in the Middle East. They know it is in any case necessary to deal with the new administration in Washington next year. They are shrewd enough to assess that any US exit strategy in Iraq that the incoming US administration formulates, will be critically dependent on Iran's cooperation. Meanwhile, the axis involving Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah remains intact. Tehran knows it can afford to sit tight for the remaining period of the Bush administration. Of course, it should not do anything rash in the meantime that might provide an alibi to Washington to lash out. Most important, the Iranian regime knows its policy enjoys strong popular support within the country. Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that the masses overwhelmingly supported Iran's "fight against arrogant power ... You can find no one in Iran willing to give up nuclear technology". The Saudis have no answer to the challenge posed by Iran. Sadly, their response is to build a wall to protect Saudi Arabia from subversion from Iraq as the US winds down its troop levels. But the Saudis need to realize the futility of warding off an existential challenge by building bunkers and concrete walls. The most critical calculation behind Tehran's policy at the present juncture would be that US-Saudi ties have come under unprecedented stress, which in turn, incrementally, weakens Riyadh's leadership role and overall standing in the region. In an insightful dispatch from Riyadh, Karen Elliott House, the Pulitzer Prize-winning diplomatic correspondent and a former publisher of the Wall Street Journal, wrote in the newspaper on Wednesday that the US and Saudi Arabia are finding it "problematic" to steer their relationship, which is already "fraying" at its edges. The core ingredients of the traditional mutually beneficial relationship - a US security blanket in lieu of cheap Saudi oil - are lacking even as the "neighborhood around Saudi Arabia has become much more threatening". House writes, "Nor can the US protect the [Saudi] regime from its own domestic challenges ... In sum, the mutual needs of the US and Saudi Arabia remain as great as at any time over the past 75 years, but the abilities of both parties to make the partnership mutually productive are diminishing, perhaps irretrievably so. It's difficult to see how this trend can be reversed, regardless who occupies the White House a year from now." Close to three decades after the Islamic revolution in Iran, Tehran will be keenly watching for signs of Saudi acceptance of the need to accommodate its rising profile as a regional power. But it is too early to tell. Things are in great flux. Lebanon, as ever before, is only one turf where the epic struggle in the region is being played out. As the Tehran Times commented, "These incidents are not limited to Lebanon. Indeed, a chain of events is unfolding from Gaza to Baghdad's Sadr City to Beirut, with the United States and Israel clearly stirring up the violence. Gaza and Beirut are strategically interconnected because the security of the Zionist regime and the United States directly depends on these three places." Riyadh is in two minds. The urbane Westernized Saudi foreign minister's uncharacteristic threat to ostracize Shi'ite Iran in the Islamic world on account of its regional policy in Lebanon harks to the past. The Saudi king's native wisdom in inviting an Iranian cleric leader to visit Riyadh at the present critical juncture beckons to the future. The House of Saud is apparently being pulled in different directions. M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001)
