Last week's clashes have raised fears that Lebanon's politicians are losing the will to keep a lid on the country's tensions, reports Lucy Fielder from Beirut Clashes across the Lebanese capital last week reminded Beirut residents of the bad old days before the 2008 Doha Agreement ended sectarian battles that spread beyond the capital and ushered in a period of calm. At the end of the gunfights, which erupted between Hizbullah supporters and those of marginal Sunni group Al-Ahbash in the western Beirut area of Burj Abi Haidar, three people lay dead, including a respected local Hizbullah official. Businesses, homes and a mosque were also burned. Both parties hastened to describe the fights as personal, having apparently started when the official tried to park in the car park of an Al-Ahbash Mosque. Al-Ahbash describes itself as a charity organisation, and it is usually considered to be non-violent. Although it is a Sunni group, and Hizbullah is Shia, both groups are supported by Syria. Fighting between the two groups rapidly got out of hand, with gunshots and the boom of rocket-propelled grenades echoing across the capital for several hours. The fighting spread to many familiar hotspots, including the mixed Sunni-Shia areas of Corniche Al-Mazraa and Ras Al-Nabeh, as well as Tarik Al-Jadida, which is largely loyal to Lebanese prime minister Saad Al-Hariri's Sunni Future Movement. Reports later in the day suggested that armed men who were not direct supporters of either party joined in, probably for sectarian reasons. A heavy deployment of the Lebanese army and a meeting between officials of the two parties and the army ended the clashes, which the army is now investigating. The outcome of the investigations may shed light on whether the shots were fired in the heat of the moment, or whether there was an attempt to use a minor dispute to stir sectarian strife. Either way, Lebanon's politicians used the occasion to produce some shrill rhetoric. The anti-Syrian 14 March Movement, of which Al-Hariri is a supporter, called for Beirut to become a weapons-free zone, which was then taken by Hizbullah as a criticism of the arsenal it maintains to fight Israel. Several Future MPs played to their Sunni audience by likening the incident to those in May 2008, which held a match to Sunni resentment of Hizbullah. "Isn't it time for us to learn that no matter what happens no side will prevail over another, and that no party is strong except for Lebanon and national unity?" Al-Hariri asked following the clashes. "This incident was exploited by the parties for their own interests," said Timur Goksel, a strategic analyst and former spokesman of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeeping force in the south of the country. "Everyone is trying to use this against each other without admitting the real problem, which is that everybody has a gun and RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades] have become a household item here." According to George Alam, an independent Lebanese political analyst, the incident could reflect Syria's shifting role in Lebanon, cemented by the cordial July summit between Syrian president Hafez Al-Assad and Saudi King Abdullah in Lebanon. "Al-Ahbash is closely linked to Syrian intelligence, and if this was a premeditated incident, then it could suggest problems between Hizbullah and Syria. It could be a message that it should not take decisions without coordinating with Syria," Alam said. Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah had earlier called on the Lebanese government to take Iran up on an offer to equip the Lebanese army with weapons. This could have set off warning bells in Damascus, Alam added, with the incident serving to remind Al-Hariri that he does not command the loyalty of all Sunnis. "The Syrians are now trying to play a role with all sides, not just Hizbullah, with Saudi backing," Alam said. However, it remains unclear whether the sudden flare-up of violence indicates a retreat from the consensus reached after Doha, which ended the May 2008 clashes sparked by a government clamp-down on Hizbullah communications networks. The Agreement prescribed a national unity government that gave Hizbullah and its allies an effective veto over cabinet decisions and led to the election of President Michel Suleiman. Calm since then has allowed relative prosperity to return to the country, at least in the services sector and in tourism. Above all, for the last two years it has been clear that no side has an interest in stirring up or manipulating events on the streets. However, according to Alam, "the Doha Agreement is starting to weaken. It didn't deal with any of the essential questions in Lebanon. It was just a settlement to buy time." Alam described the recent clash as raising questions connected to the ongoing debate on arming the Lebanese army, reignited after clashes on the border in early August between the Lebanese and Israeli armies. One question concerns the army's internal role, as during clashes it is often used as a police force. However, Lebanese army soldiers generally try to avoid direct intervention, seen as risking a replay of the civil war split of the army along sectarian lines. The incident also sheds light on the army's relationship with Hizbullah, Alam said. "The army is an ally of Hizbullah in the south, where it is confronting Israel, but it is not internally." In the debate over arms for the Lebanese army, the incident raises the question of whether "the Arab states, for example, will step forward to help and prevent Iran from being the only country supporting the army." Despite Nasrallah's calls, Lebanon is unlikely to request Iranian military aid for the army, he said. Many Lebanese MPs would balk, to say the least, at accepting weaponry from Iran, and US and Saudi opposition would be overwhelming. Meanwhile, Arab, US and French support remains mostly political, with analysts agreeing that little by way of combat equipment has been transferred to the Lebanese army from these sources. The US froze $100 billion of military aid to Lebanon the day before clashes broke out on the border between the Lebanese army and Israel in early August, and it remains unclear whether that aid will be released. Given Tehran's support for Hizbullah, Alam said, Iranian aid to the Lebanese army would be seen as increasing not only Iranian influence in the country, but also Shia dominance over other sects. Goksel agreed. "I definitely see [Iranian assistance to the Lebanese army] as a no-go. It would create too many internal and external problems."
