As Lebanon remains marred by internal disputes over the country's future, Serene Assir ponders the real meaning of sovereignty More than a year on from the opening of a war of words between two opposing camps in Lebanon, it appears that the question of political identity and affiliation is as far from being resolved as it has ever been. Last week, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1680 calling on Damascus to establish diplomatic relations and demarcate Syria's borders with its southern neighbour. Comment on the resolution emerging from some in Beirut and Damascus described it as "propaganda" and as an "unjustifiable pressure tool" respectively. Others -- particularly those aligned with the anti-Syrian camp represented by Future Movement leader Saad Al-Hariri, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and Lebanese Forces Chief Samir Geagea -- are more than happy to have the weight of the UN behind them, no matter if the new resolution is but a restatement of prior invocations on the territorial integrity of Lebanon. This time round, however, the focus is clearer; the UN is interested in Lebanon's sovereignty vis-à-vis Syria, rather than Lebanon's sovereignty vis-à-vis international intervention as a whole. Just as foreign intervention in Lebanon is increasingly taking the form of specific US and UN meddling, it would be as naïve to assume -- as numerous parties and countries aligned against Washington have -- that the "brotherly" relationship Damascus refers to when discussing its views on Beirut is devoid of burdens. After all, Damascus' record on political rights of late has been going from bad to worse, peaking last week with the arrest of 12 prominent dissidents who signed a petition calling for full independence for Lebanon and democracy in Syria. It seems President Bashar Al-Assad learned a trick or two from his late father, who believed that in order to root out dissent, one must punish and torture, rather than reconciling competing forces in the name of better governance. It is of little surprise that camps in Lebanon seeking to revive the country's integrity have sought to team up with outside forces. Yet, it must also be recognised that however irreverent and ultimately infantile Damascene politics have been through much of the era of Assad senior and junior, there are better ways for suave Lebanese to play their cards. The key lies in addressing the main question that underlines all political discourse in Lebanon today: who are we really? It increasingly appears that despite the urgent need to find an answer, politics today are more aware of another, more pressing concern. Money. Within 24 hours of the passing of Resolution 1680, anti-Syrian website Ya Libnan hailed the "good news" the Beirut Stock Market had allegedly been "craving". The value of most shares reportedly went up. A look into the background of the leaders of the anti-Syrian camp also reveals how it is not so much a political or ideological programme that is driving them on. Indeed, the "Cedar Revolution" that was granted so much airtime by mainstream media across the world -- particularly in the West -- was not much of a revolution at all. It was a charade, set up to please an aggrieved people badly affected by years of not knowing and not feeling secure, finally given the chance to express themselves as free. No doubt, in their hearts, the Lebanese are free, and in their public institutions there is likely more freedom than in the whole of the Arab world combined. But what of true freedom? What of the freedom to dream without intrusion -- neither by Syria, nor by America, nor by the UN, nor even the fear of becoming? Six years on from the withdrawal of Israeli troops from South Lebanon, the state of politics in the country is marred by bitter division -- Jumblatt on one extreme, Hizbullah on the other, with Damascus and Washington calling them "liar" and "terrorist" respectively. The Lebanese are going to have to find the middle ground and hence resolution to a longer conflict -- that of the definition of home. Otherwise, naiveté and short-term concerns, such as the immediate activity of market shares, will obscure the pressing task of extracting Lebanon from the role it has been forced into for years: that of being the backdrop and locale of the struggles of others. What is of mere practical and strategic concern to countries immediately surrounding Lebanon has often been a matter of life or death for the Lebanese. That Lebanese politicians are always eyeing the exterior, waiting for orders as to how they should align, is also a practice that should end.
