The U.S. and France have delivered the strongest international message yet that Syria is unwelcome in Lebanon.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier held a joint news conference in London on Tuesday, the text of which is here :
- FOREIGN MINISTER BARNIER - The Lebanese want to be masters of their own fate, and we, in France, we encouraged this because in France nothing, we can never be indifferent to what is happening in Lebanon, and our way of encouraging this is to repeat what is included in the document which we co-sponsored with the United States. We want the complete implementation of Resolution 1559. We also want the truth, we want the truth to know who is responsible for the death of Rafik Hariri, and we also want all the foreign military troops to be withdrawn from Lebanon, and also the organization of true, genuine elections in this country ...
SECRETARY RICE - the Lebanese people are beginning to express their aspirations for democracy, their aspirations that they be able to carry out their political aspirations without foreign interference. This is something that we support very much. Resolution 1559, which was co-sponsored by France and the United States within the UN Security Council, calls very firmly for free elections, free and fair elections to take place in Lebanon, for foreign forces, both troops and intelligence forces, to withdraw and for the Lebanese people to be able to conduct their affairs, Lebanese for Lebanon, and not with foreign interference, and this is something on which we agreed very much.
....the Syrians have a very clear view of what needs to be done. They know what is required in Resolution 1559, it should be recognized. But at this point in time, we have a circumstance in which on several fronts, whether it is Iraqi insurgents who are being supported on Syrian territory and causing the kind of hideous attacks that we had yesterday against the Iraqi people; or support for terrorists who are trying to frustrate the Palestinian/Israeli peace; or, keeping foreign interference in Lebanese affairs that the Syrians are out of step with where the region is going and out of step with the aspirations of the people of the Middle East.
The important thing is that Resolution 1559 is very clear that foreign interference should not be carried out. We will focus very much, I think also, on what we can help the Lebanese to do. That means support for free and fair elections, that means election observers if necessary, monitoring if necessary, and as we see how the Lebanese will move forward, I think we have to look at what can be done in terms of helping them to stabilize the situation should that become necessary ...
Article comments
1 - Tom French
Does this sound like pre-invasion propaganda, or what?
2 - Eric Olsen
invasion of who by whom? I thought it was about reversing an invasion.
3 - SFC SKI
Wrong, Eric. The peace-loving Syrian government has been preemptively protecting their Leabanese brother from American invasion for over a decade.
4 - Tom French
So would it be reversing an invasion if Syria attacked the US in Iraq? Bush is setting up another forced democratic-conversion. Will it be east (iran) or west (syria)?
5 - Eric Olsen
and this is how the ingrate "Lebanese street" repays their kindness?
6 - Aaman
Falafel prices must be rising
7 - Eric Olsen
well Tom, if he is, he has the backing of both France and the U.N.
8 - Tom French
That doesn't necessarily guarantee the correctness of these actions.
9 - Eric Olsen
I have a hard time seeing anything morally incorrect about insisting Syria withdraw a standing army of 15,000 from the neck of its diminutive neighbor, and to insist that Islamist fanatics don't get hold of nuclear weapons, but that's just me.
10 - Aaman
What is extremely interesting about the Syrian situation is that the country has been traditionally secular, in keeping with its multi-ethnic composition. It is only in recent times that the Sunni majority, fomented by Iran, has turned significantly towards Islamic conservatism.
11 - Tom French
Maybe not morally incorrect, but hypocritical in that the US has an occupying force in a country not far away.
12 - Eric Olsen
ah, now that I can see: it could be viewed as hypocritical I agree, but don't intentions count? And the fact that we will leave as soon as we possibly can and have no intention of making Iraq a puppet state? And the fact that Iraq had democratic elections for the first time as a direct result of that occupation?
13 - Aaman
Eric, the first elections in Iraq were in 1954, still under British colonial rule
There was also a parliamentary election in 1980, when the Baathists won 187 of the 250 seats, 1984 - Baathists won 73%, then the Saddam 99% elections became the norm.
Historically, therefore, Iraqis, and much of the Middle East have a memory of weak democratic governments beholden to colonial powers like the British. (Good comparison to past attempts to foster democracy in the region here
14 - Eric Olsen
ah yes, I didn't mean to imply "first time ever," but I see that's how it reads
15 - Tom French
I will concede that intentions do count for a lot. I am, personally, skeptical though, what Mr Bush's true intentions are.
16 - Big Time Patriot
"we will leave as soon as we possibly can"
What will be victory in Syria? We still apparently haven't decided what victory is in Iraq. Was it that Iraqi WMD's are no longer a threat? Is it that bad man Saddam is no longer in power? Is it that elections haven't been held?
Don't say that we will be gone as soon as we possibly can unless you are willing to define the goal of the war BEFORE we start. And I, like many Americans aren't entirely happy with an administration and its supporters who use DIFFERENT goals AFTER the war is already going on.
Why EXACTLY are we attacking Syria? And what EXACTLY will be a successful result? And what EXACT conditions will be grounds to bring our troops home?
Conditions can change after a war starts, but if you go INTO the war without real goals, don't ever expect to get out "as soon as you possibly can"
17 - Eric Olsen
we aren't attacking Syria or Iran: we are working with Europe and the U.N. to help usher Syria out of Lebanon, ensure free elections in Lebanon, hold Syria accountable for its actions and the actions of terrorists it harbors, and preventing Iran from acquiring nukes. At this point it appears these goals can be met with carrots and sticks short of military invasion behind the united front of US, Europe, UN