ROME CONFERENCE ON LEBANON WAS SET UP FOR FAILURE: A stacked deck? A shameful sham to stall for time? Or both?

(Photos: WorldNews)

"Keep your friends close. But keep your enemies even closer."

That old adage is not only a credible dictum, but a worthy common-sense practice that warrants application in real life as well. Even more so on the world stage, where smart and effective diplomacy matters. Why wasn't it applied during the Rome Conference on Lebanon, July 26, 2006?

Attending the Conference, as reported in the media, were the US, France, Russia, Britain, the European Union (EU), Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Nations (UN) and the World Bank. And that Germany, Spain and Jordan had also been invited and that officials from Lebanon and other Arab states were expected to attend. Some fifteen countries and entities in all would be represented .

How on earth can a peace be reached if all or some of the principal players are not included- or simply shut out? Meaning Israel, Iran, Syria and Hezbullah; especially the former three. Iran and Syria should have been included because they are alleged to be the primary sponsors of Hezbulla with financial and military backing. Why invite Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia and not Syria and Iran? Answer: Simply to stack the deck. Quite naturally Israel should have been there.

We all know the power brokers, US and Britain, had no intentions of bending or agreeing to a cease fire. If so, then why even attend or agree to hold a conference period? Just another stalling tactic and sham, as previously reported to provide more time for Israel to continue its campaign to eliminate Hezbullah, with unfettered devastation and killing of innocent civilians, coupled with needless destruction of Lebanon’s infrastructures-crude punishment for allowing Hezbulla to exist within its borders.

The LA Times stated that “ Rice and the British representatives stood virtually alone in opposing an immediate cease-fire, participants in the talks said. Russia, Italy, France, the United Nations and all Arab delegates made an especially vocal argument for a halt to hostilities.” However, the US and Britain prevailed; irregardless of how twisted and inhumane their positions appear to be. Thus, the entire body of conferees allowed themselves to be held hostage by two unified allies and unwavering attendees.

Obviously the paramount question remains: “Why didn’t the UN, EU/European and Arab countries press for inclusion of the principal parties, or threaten to collectively boycott the meeting if those key players were not invited. Simply having a statement read by D'Alema, the Italian foreign minister, noting that “key players in the region, Israel and Hezbullah, and patrons Syria and Iran were not invited,” was and is not enough.

The intentional omission of those parties is an abomination of the worst kind, especially when it is acknowledged they are paramount to reaching an immediate end to the fighting. Unquestionably, this blatant lack of foresight and inept diplomacy is a grave disservice to both the peoples of Israel and Lebanon, and the Middle East as a whole. As emphasized by King Abdullah of Saudia Arabia who warned of a regional war "that would not spare no one" if Isareli "arrogance" barred the resolution of a cease fire or a peace."




(Google Image)

Again, "keep your friends close, but your enemies even closer. " Apparently, the power brokers and the other conferees did not and do not understand that principle.

So, was the Rome Conference on Lebanon a stacked deck, due to behind the scenes heavy preconference armed twisting strategies that of which ensured a prerranged unfortunate outcome, or was it just a shameful sham to stall for more time? Or was it both? You decide.

NOTE: See my July 25th posting, last paragraphs.