The Lebanese National Dialogue conference tackles key subjects, but will it lead to positive results? The prospects look weak so far, reports Serene Assir Top Lebanese politicians gathered through the week in parliament to discuss some of the issues that became key points of contention since the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri in 2005. With meetings scheduled to end Thursday, leaders of the various sects and interest parties were set to talk about and make decisions on questions as thorny and controversial as the status of the Shebaa Farms, potential drives for the disarmament of groups in the Palestinian refugee camps, the tenure of pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud and the ongoing probe into Hariri's death. Called by parliamentary House Speaker Nabih Berri, the talks have involved practically everyone who matters in Lebanese politics, ranging from leader of the Future Movement and of a parliamentary majority bloc, Saad Al-Hariri son of the late prime minister, to Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, and from head of the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea to fellow Maronite arch-enemy head of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), Michel Aoun. The dialogue comes at a time of pressing need for greater cooperation, less enemy bashing and fewer diatribes by sectarian leaders against each other. Many Lebanese have, regardless of their individual political stance, been increasingly critical of some leaders' growing tendencies to engage in fruitless verbal combat with each other -- Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, once described as the "weathervane" for Lebanese politics, bearing the brunt of the majority of such accusations. Indeed, the last thing Lebanon needs right now is a continued escalation of tension of the kind witnessed over the past year. Thus the idea of holding such a conference cannot but be a good thing, at least in principle. This much-anticipated National Dialogue featured a strict agenda, numerous references to United Nations Security Council 1559 and the search for ways to implement it, weapons and the future of Lebanese-Syrian relations. Behind closed doors, a total of 14 leaders commissioned the cabinet with the responsibility to pursue new avenues in investigating Hariri's assassination, and by Monday it appeared that decisions on the status of the Palestinian refugees were in the making. According to Lebanese news reports, there has been talk of a resolution forbidding the deployment of weapons outside the refugee camps, and greater efforts to limit the possession of arms within. Such a decision, if confirmed, brings to mind a biting UN report by special envoy Terje Roed-Larsen issued earlier this year highlighting the continued armament of Palestinians, overshadowed by the high-profile but less conclusive Mehlis- led investigation into Hariri's death. On the Palestinian arms issue, Hizbullah is expected to lend a hand coordinating and exerting due pressure. In contrast, it seems somewhat conspicuous that the issue of Hizbullah's weapons has somehow slipped into the background, despite the fact that Larsen's report also called for the end of Shia-led resistance capacity building in the south of the country. Then again, Lebanon has, over recent months, borne witness to an astounding series of twists in political logic; it would not be surprising that Hizbullah, in a bid to play its diplomatic cards right, would agree to pressure the Palestinians so long as no pressure is exerted on its own ranks. Meanwhile, Saad Al-Hariri played out his established role; heavy on slick over-enthusiasm for the premise of the conference as a platform for unity and weak on practical home grown policy. The weight of UN threats against Syria -- which include a demand for the ouster of Lahoud and determination of the status of the Shebaa Farms -- were no doubt the thorniest issues, so much so that ministers' statements on discussion of the topics were contradictory and confused. No decision had been reached at the time of writing on either Shebaa or Lahoud. But politics in Lebanon did not stop happening all the while. A public petition, called by the 14 March Forces -- formed by the Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Jumblatt- led Druze -- seeking the ouster of the increasingly unpopular president went on making the rounds, despite the fact that new allies Nasrallah and Aoun, said last week that the petition was making unconstitutional demands. The 14 March Forces are hoping to amass one million votes and, according to sources from the Future Youth Movement, take it to the presidential palace at Baabda. In Syria, President Bashar Al-Assad, during a speech Sunday praising the initiative to hold the conference, described the talks as "positive and reasonable". Nevertheless he criticised anti-Syrian policies pursued by the Hariri-led parliamentary majority, which he described as a "false majority". And, rhetoric aside, with Aoun and Nasrallah now in league with each other, he may not be completely off the mark, at least insofar that power is now neatly divided across the middle, with the 14 March Forces on one hand, and the new Hizbullah-FPM alliance on the other. Lahoud may not be willing to step down from the presidency just yet, nor is Aoun willing to exert any kind of pressure until he secures his own bid for the coveted seat. There seemed to be no place for such cynicism at the National Dialogue, but neither was there place for any constructive decision, at least at the time of writing, on anything but the Palestinians. And they weren't even there. There ought to be greater care taken of good opportunities in Beirut, for, as historical record shows, they are rare.
