Neoconservatism waxes in Lebanon while it wanes everywhere else
Posted by worriedlebanese on 28/06/2007
The whole approach to the International Tribunal in Lebanon fits perfectly a neoconservative mindset, but seems rather inadequate for any other one. The political forces backing the government have been presenting the tribunal as the end result of their action, while it’s part of a longer process and the beginning of a new and much more dangerous stage.
I have always defended the importance of ideas (“ideas matter”), but I see myself arguing against it lately when people start talking about sovereignty and justice. It is quite obvious that I am all for “sovereignty” and “justice”, but I do not believe one can reduce politics to words and ideals. One must first see how one can put these words into action. What is the likelihood of one’s success and what one is willing to pay for that.
The slogan one has been hearing since February 2005 is “we want the truth”. If that is the cas, do we need an international tribunal. Can’t an inquiry suffice?
I am not saying that one should sacrifice his values in the name of realpolitics. The question is not there. The Syrian government shouldn’t be given what it wants for the sake of security in Lebanon. This would mean rewarding it for the instability it has been causing the country. What the government and the political class should be asking itself is how it can prevent instability in the country; how it can immunise the country against Syrian and Israeli interventions.