After years of accusing Syria of killing his father, Lebanon's prime minister recently dropped his charges. But what if Hizbullah members are indicted? Lucy Fielder reports from Beirut The slow but dramatic transformation of Syria's relations with its erstwhile critics in Lebanon culminated in early September in Prime Minister 's unequivocal absolution of Damascus regarding his father's 2005 assassination. That killing threw Lebanon into turmoil and was followed by accusations of Syrian culpability because of its long military and political domination over its smaller neighbour. Although Syria subsequently withdrew its troops under Lebanese and international pressure, five years later it retains strong influence in Lebanon and appears to have weathered the worst of the regional and international storms. "At some point, we made a mistake," Al-Hariri told the Saudi-owned daily Asharq Al-Awsat in remarks published on 6 September. "At one stage, we accused Syria ... That was a political accusation, and that political accusation is over." Al-Hariri's Damascene conversion comes amid a widespread belief that Syria is off the hook for the killing. Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah announced that he expected (after receiving a tip-off from the premier himself) the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague to try "rogue elements" of his Shia organisation for Al-Hariri's death. So far all else is media speculation; the court has issued no charges and holds no suspects in custody. But the spectre of a Hizbullah-related indictment has raised fears of strife, particularly between Sunnis and Shia. Al-Hariri's statement also follows a rapprochement between Al-Hariri's chief backer, Saudi Arabia, and Syria, after Al-Hariri's killing threw their ideological differences and rivalry for regional influence into sharp relief. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and Saudi King Abdallah met at an unprecedented Beirut mini-summit in July to discuss concerns about the repercussions of such an indictment. Meanwhile, Al-Hariri's statement was on the whole welcomed by both his supporters and critics, but Lebanese reaction took another twist this week with a press conference by former head of General Security Jamil Al-Sayed, one of the "four generals" arrested and held without charge after the Al-Hariri killing and released last year. Al-Sayed accused Al-Hariri of backing several witnesses, including Hossam Hossam and Zuheir Siddiq, who gave testimony pointing to Syrian involvement in the killing only to recant it later. Hariri told Asharq Al-Awsat that false witnesses had "misled" the investigation and poisoned relations between Lebanon and Syria, but Al-Sayed accused Al-Hariri of using them to frame Syria early in the investigation. "Al-Hariri wanted to close the file with Syria but it backfired," said Rosana Bou Monsef, an analyst for the pro-Hariri An- Nahar newspaper. "He is now being asked to go far beyond that." Al-Hariri's statement cements the slow decline of the anti-Syrian movement, 14 March, named after the vast demonstration demanding Syria's exit from Lebanon on that date in 2005. The movement's driving force, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, jumped ship last summer. Such shifts are common, and rarely held to account, under Lebanon's sectarian political system. Meanwhile, Al-Hariri has visited Damascus several times since taking the reins of government last year. Al-Hariri's switch has also intensified speculation of a Syrian "return" to Lebanon, not militarily but in its old role as kingmaker. "We are already seeing this," Bou Monsef said. "Syria now has good relations with everyone. Saudi Arabia is trying to drive a wedge between Syria and Iran and to give Damascus more of a role here." As well as attempting to put Iran in a corner, courting Damascus could be part of a US and Saudi attempt to drive a wedge between Syria and its ally Hizbullah, analysts say. But Al-Assad is in a strong position, said Karim Makdisi, political science professor at the American University of Beirut. "I see no reason why Syria would want to break up a successful and loyal alliance with Iran for the US, which is notoriously unreliable as an ally." Makdisi said confrontation was likely to grow between Hizbullah and its allies in the parliamentary opposition and the government over Lebanon's continued official support for the Hariri tribunal. The court necessarily operates with Lebanese consent and Beirut funds 51 per cent of its budget. Tellingly, Al-Sayed said Al-Hariri should drop his support for the court. "Your right to demand the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) has fallen... enough, the issue is over," he said. With his retraction of blame for Syria, Al-Hariri has paved the way for an about-face on the tribunal too, should the threat of domestic strife push him in that direction. "Now that Al-Hariri is coming out with this statement, he's put himself in a position where he may have to consider removing consent for the court," Makdisi said. "It all depends on what happens on the international stage, but at some point I think the opposition is going to challenge the government on its support for the tribunal." If matters come to a head, Hizbullah and its allies could push for a vote of no confidence, recalling its campaign against the government that ended with the 2008 Doha Accord and the national unity government that followed. Analysts agree that Al-Hariri may have turned the page with Syria, but he did not tackle the big issue of the coming months. "The question remains what he believes about Hizbullah. Does he believe it is guilty?" Makdisi said. A Hizbullah indictment is likely to put Al-Hariri in an impossible position. After years of campaigning in support of the court, Al-Hariri may be forced to condemn its indictment for fear of instability and strife between his mainly Sunni followers and Lebanon's Shia.
