The indictment reportedly accusing Hezbollah members of killing a former prime minister will fuel unrest, not justice.

Hicham Safieddine.

The indictment delivered by the UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) to Lebanon’s state prosecutor Saeed Merza marks the latest twist in a widely publicised and highly controversial operation of international justice.

The indictment reportedly accusing four members of Lebanon’s party Hezbollah in the 2005 killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri will usher in a new phase of confrontation between Hezbollah on one hand and its local, regional and international enemies on the other. Domestic tensions will reach another high. Pro-Hariri March 14 forces have met the decision with much fanfare and political posturing. Hezbollah is expected to strike back with its Secretary General Hasan Nasrallah slated to deliver a televised speech on Saturday addressing the issue.

But the indictment and its immediate fallout is unlikely to lead to actual arrests or upset the existing balance of power within the country in isolation of other regional developments. Since its inception as a fact finding mission in the wake of Hariri’s killing on February 14, 2005, the tribunal has been marred by a serious credibility deficit, constant political interference, and heightened media speculation. The court may have the full backing of Western powers and the stamp of formal authority of international law, but it lacks the executive teeth to implement its decisions and the moral high ground – in the eyes of many Lebanese – to extract concessions by means other than force.

The full impact of the tribunal’s latest measure is best understood in the context of its past conduct and legal standing with the Lebanese state; the recent accession to the seat of government by Hezbollah and its allies; and the profound regional transformations known as the Arab Spring or Arab Revolts, most notably the uprising in neighbouring Syria whose political influence in Lebanon cannot be underestimated.

A clash of narratives

The tribunal is a court of many culprits but no smoking gun. Mainstream media coverage in the West has largely parroted the official narrative of the tribunal as leaked from its offices or portrayed by its proponents. But any keen observer of Lebanon’s local media is aware that the dominant narrative on the international stage breaks down into several conflicting ones on the domestic front. These narratives draw on a complicated network of sources and scenarios.

Internationally, the two most notable and recent journalistic investigations into the affair were those of Germany’s publication, Der Spiegel, in May 2009, and Canada’s state broadcaster, CBC, in November 2010. Both reports strongly insinuated that Hezbollah was behind the attack. According to the tribunal sources quoted by the two media outlets, a 2007 probe by a special unit of Lebanon’s security forces uncovered a network of mobile phones that was activated, operated, and dismantled in sync with the timing and location of the assassination. The media reports, however, make no reference to the fact that Lebanon’s telecommunication networks used as evidence is severely undermined by counter findings of cases of alleged Israeli espionage within Lebanon’s phone network.

In July of last year, local media reported that Charbil Qazzi and Tarek al-Rabaa, two high ranking employees at Lebanon’s major telecommunications network Alpha, were arrested and charged with spying for Israel. Hezbollah-led March 8 forces were quick to argue that the entire communications network has been exposed to Israel manipulation and control. In August, Nasrallah held what amounted to a public deposition indicting Israel in the killing of Hariri. In addition to exposing the infiltration of Lebanon’s phone networks, Nasrallah placed another alleged Israeli spy and former Lebanese army officer by the name of Ghassan al-Jidd at the crime scene shortly before the crime took place. Nasrallah also showed video footage described as Israeli aerial surveillance of Hariri’s car convoys in the years preceding the attack. Nasrallah then called on the tribunal to take this circumstantial evidence into account, something the latter has apparently avoided.

read more