Lebanon's army is being dragged into a conflict that could pit it against its long-time ally, Hizbullah, Lucy Fielder reports from Beirut Preliminary results of a military-judicial investigation into the shooting of anti-government protesters in the southern suburbs were released this week, leading to the arrest of three officers and eight soldiers on the orders of military prosecutor Jean Fahd. Eight civilians were killed two weeks ago when the army opened fire on unarmed demonstrators burning tires in protest at debilitating daily power cuts. While the investigation has yet to conclude, the arrests signal that the army has taken seriously opposition pressure to hold someone accountable. They also diffused anger in the largely Shia suburbs that even the opposition might have had difficulty controlling. Shia resistance and political group Hizbullah, in particular, had made clear it would not permit a whitewash in the name of keeping a fragile peace. It is not clear whether all the victims of the shooting incident, who included a rescue worker trying to help the injured, were killed by army fire. The first man to die, Ahmed Hamzah, appears to have been liaising with the army when he was shot, fuelling reports that other gunmen were at work. Lebanon was as usual split down the middle regarding the meaning of the investigation. While some believed the unusual phenomenon of a state institution being held to account would boost the army's credibility, others accused the opposition, led by Iranian and Syrian-backed Hizbullah, of targeting the army. The ruling, anti-Syrian "14 March" bloc warned of a "suspicious campaign by the opposition" and questioned its loyalties. Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea described events as "an attempt to bring the Syrian army back to Lebanon", which it dominated from the end of the Civil War in 1990 until the immediate aftermath of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri's February 2005 assassination, which many blamed on Syria. Many opposition supporters believe the shooting incident was stirred up to draw the army into the southern suburbs of Beirut, much of which is under Hizbullah control and free from the troops and checkpoints now commonplace across the rest of the capital. Both sides in Lebanon's east- west tug-of-war suggest the army, seen as neutral during the past three years' of political acrimony, is being deliberately dragged into a confrontation. Tangible evidence was furnished by at least 11 minor attacks on army positions this week, including a drive-by shooting that injured two soldiers, one seriously, close to Chiah, scene of the "Bloody Sunday" events of 27 January. A sound grenade was thrown in another incident. "These attacks on the army are a new phenomenon," said Elias Hanna, a retired general and political science professor at Notre Dame University. "Are these incidents meant to influence the army and put pressure on the investigation or is it part of a bigger picture? No one knows." Hanna is of the view that Hizbullah wants to contain the army. "At the level of grand strategy, the army is a competitor to Hizbullah. The army is caught in a big game with small means," he said. He stopped short of accusing the opposition of attacking the army, which is relatively weak and has long been on friendly terms with Hizbullah and supportive of its resistance to Israel. For Karim Makdisi, assistant professor of political science at the American University of Beirut, the investigation is a major test of the army's credibility and therefore its effectiveness. "The question becomes now, having identified a few people, what are you going to do with them? Will it lead to the dismissal of somebody, to signal that 'Okay, we're dealing with this'?" he asked. If the army is being dragged into a struggle, it is wider than the current tit-for-tat manoeuvring between government and opposition over electing a president -- a post vacant since pro-Syrian president Emile Lahoud stepped down without a successor chosen on 23 November -- or seats in a subsequent cabinet. Many believe that Lebanon's travails for the past three turbulent years boil down to a tussle for Hizbullah's weapons, ever since UN Security Council Resolution 1559 was passed in September 2004, which calls for the movement's disarmament. "The larger picture is also important," Makdisi said. "It again signifies that the army is being targeted, is at the centre of this larger, not just national but also regional and international battle taking place, that's trying to drive a wedge between the army and the resistance." That battle was most obvious in July 2006, when Israel laid to waste much of southern Lebanon in an attempt to destroy Hizbullah. Many see the political crisis that followed as a continuation of that war by other means, with local isolation of Hizbullah and its allies backed by unequivocal Western support afforded to the government of Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora. Opposition protests have been condemned as coup attempts and in June, the United States banned entry for anyone seeking to undermine or topple Lebanon's government. Such rhetoric has effectively criminalised the opposition, critics say, despite being supported by an estimated half or more of the Lebanese population. "It's been fairly obvious that the Western powers want to remove the legitimacy and credibility the resistance has always had post-1990s," Makdisi said. Under Lahoud, who was army commander before he became president, then Michel Suleiman, the current army chief who is the main candidate for president, the army has maintained been strong ties with Hizbullah. Despite its limited means, it gave symbolic support during the 2006 war. Many fear the army could split if pressured too hard to take sides. US and Israeli ambitions to wrest Hizbullah's arms and the group's determination to keep them are at the heart of the political conflict over power sharing. Suleiman's candidacy is no longer a safe bet given controversy over the army and the protracted nature of the present political squabbling, widely expected to lead to the 14th postponement of the parliamentary session to elect a president, scheduled for 11 February. But the real battle is over seats in the cabinet, which holds executive power. Hizbullah, Amal and Christian ally Michel Aoun are holding out for a veto-wielding third in a national unity government, partly to secure more representation, and partly to make sure that no strategic decision -- including one on the resistance's arms -- can be taken without them. An Arab League initiative has proposed the already agreed upon election of Suleiman and an alteration of electoral law, but stalled on the allocation of cabinet seats. On the eve of Secretary- General Amr Moussa's third visit to Lebanon in 2008 on Friday, there were few hopes that he might succeed in breaking Lebanon's lasting deadlock.
