logo
Can Lebanon's new government finally achieve justice for Beirut blast victims?

Can Lebanon's new government finally achieve justice for Beirut blast victims?

The National5 days ago
August 4 will mark the fifth anniversary of the Beirut port explosion that killed more than 200 people, one of the largest non-nuclear explosions ever. The families of the victims are still awaiting justice. Earlier this year the magistrate investigating the tragedy, Tariq Bitar, resumed his investigation, which had been suspended after politicians had repeatedly intervened to derail it.
The election of Joseph Aoun as president in January, which was followed by the appointment of Nawaf Salam as prime minister, led to much hope that Mr Bitar's efforts would achieve results. They may yet, not least because the magistrate has shown great persistence and courage in moving ahead in his task, but the obstacles remain immense.
What is in Mr Bitar's favour is that Mr Salam, a former judge who was president of the International Court of Justice, has committed to pushing forward a plan for the independence of the judiciary. Mr Aoun has also sought to portray himself as a reformer. However, it is almost certain that politics will again complicate matters.
Once an indictment threatens the power of Lebanon's political leadership, they will circle the wagons and seek to neutralise the investigation
Mr Bitar had cast a wide net on responsibility in his investigation, which rubbed many members of Lebanon's political class the wrong way. Beirut port was a house of many mansions, in which the country's different political factions named their people to positions of influence. In summoning politicians and security figures to see who was responsible for allowing the ammonium nitrate that caused the explosion to be stored at the port, the magistrate provoked alarm and pushback across the political spectrum.
In October 2021, Hezbollah and the allied Amal movement took the protests up a notch, in an alarming way. Their partisans organised a demonstration against Mr Bitar before the Palace of Justice, passing by the Christian neighbourhood of Ain Al Remmaneh. On their way, a number of demonstrators entered the neighbourhood, shouting sectarian slogans, provoking a response from young men in the area who killed at least one demonstrator.
The decision to enter Ain Al Remmaneh was not fortuitous. A large majority of the victims of the explosion were Christians. By invading a predominantly Christian area and shouting pro-Shiite slogans, the demonstrators wanted to show that if the Bitar investigation continued, it could lead to sectarian conflict.
After the shooting of the demonstrators, Hezbollah and Amal returned with their weapons, which could have led to an armed sectarian clash. At just the right moment, however, the army intervened and fired on the armed demonstrators, killing several of them and stopping them in their tracks, which restored calm and prevented the worst.
Behind the scenes, the military told those close to it, not unreasonably, that it had averted a new civil war, though it never publicly acknowledged responsibility for firing on the demonstrators. The army commander at the time was Joseph Aoun, the current president.
Therefore, between Mr Aoun, who showed great decisiveness in October 2021, and Mr Salam, who supports an independent judiciary, Mr Bitar may have little to fear. Yet the likelihood is the judge will face the same obstacles he did under the government of former prime minister Najib Mikati if Mr Bitar decides to arrest senior politicians. On top of this, we can't ignore that the president or prime minister may have political calculations of their own.
For example, while Mr Aoun retains much respect, he has also sought to preserve a good relationship with the parliament speaker, Nabih Berri, and with Hezbollah. This makes sense in practical terms, because both still have the power to block many decisions in the country. The president is also keen, under international pressure, to reach a peaceful agreement with Hezbollah over its weapons, therefore wants to avoid anything that might hinder this.
Mr Aoun, it also seems, would like to bring a contingent of supporters to parliament in the elections next year. Several of his prospective candidates are well known, and were expelled from the Free Patriotic Movement led by Gebran Bassil. Most of them would require Shiite votes to be re-elected in their districts, namely Baabda, Jbeil, and even the Metn, where solid Shiite voting blocs exist.
Would Mr Aoun jeopardise such support if it means backing Mr Bitar's decision to bring in politicians or security figures close to Mr Berri and Hezbollah for questioning? Given his electoral ambitions, and Mr Berri's and Hezbollah's centrality to his other aims, it's not certain.
It may be too early to make predictions, although there have been reports that Mr Bitar would like to bring out indictments on the five-year anniversary. But even if indictments are issued, how might the political class react? The port explosion is like Agatha Christie's Murder on the Orient Express, in that the negligence and corruption making it possible stretched across the political landscape, so that everyone was in on the crime.
We can be certain that once an indictment threatens the power of Lebanon's political leadership, they will circle the wagons and seek to neutralise the investigation. They may not be able to stop Mr Bitar, and it would be foolish at this stage to try, but they might try to find scapegoats and limit indictments to such figures, before closing the file.
The wild card here is Mr Bitar himself. He has shown great integrity in pursuing his work, despite the very real risks he has faced. He's not likely to agree to sweep things under the rug. However, many of his superiors may do so. The victims' families would like to see justice, as is their right, but Lebanon is a country where justice has been absent for decades.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

With Gaza in the global spotlight, expect Israel to turn the heat on Hezbollah
With Gaza in the global spotlight, expect Israel to turn the heat on Hezbollah

The National

time5 hours ago

  • The National

With Gaza in the global spotlight, expect Israel to turn the heat on Hezbollah

Israel finds itself in need of diverting global attention away from its atrocities in Gaza. Enter Hezbollah. The Israeli government appears to see renewed war with the Lebanese group as a chance to further its interests, pretexting the latter's refusal to surrender its weapons to the Lebanese state as it previously pledged. The timing is driven by several factors. The administration of US President Donald Trump has grown weary of waiting for Beirut to fulfil its promise of exclusive state control over arms, and it might be ready to endorse any Israeli decision, regardless of its severity. Another factor is Iran's unwillingness to enter a direct war with Israel on Hezbollah's behalf. Indeed, Tehran is both preoccupied with the fallout from the recent US and Israeli strikes and worried about another wave of attacks in the near future. Still, it refuses to abandon its strategy of using armed regional proxies as bargaining chips in potential negotiations with Washington. Tensions between the US and Iran are thus escalating – manifested through American sanctions, Iranian threats and Israeli war preparations. Iran's proxies in Lebanon and Yemen are on high alert, and the wider Iranian 'Axis of Resistance' is watching events closely, from Iraq to Gaza. Israel has zero tolerance regarding Hezbollah's arsenal. It has convinced the Trump administration that if the Lebanese government fails to implement its disarmament pledge, Israel has no choice but to press ahead with its war on the group. Meanwhile, the international conference on the two-state solution – co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and France at the UN – might have angered Iran. The Islamic Republic's ideology rejects the two-state solution, with its doctrine calling for Israel's destruction. Moreover, the conference's show of global support for the Palestinian Authority as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people was also a collective cry against Hamas, a key player in Iran's axis. Just as Israel is indifferent to the civilian toll in Gaza, Iran appears unbothered by Palestinian suffering, particularly as long as Hamas remains faithful to the axis. Mr Trump was recently forced to acknowledge the human-made famine in Gaza, having previously denied this reality. While he didn't initially act against Israel, which is enacting a policy of starvation in the enclave, he spoke about it after parts of his Maga political base pressed him to intervene to end the humanitarian catastrophe. This was accompanied by a different kind of global political pressure as Mr Trump was challenged by European and non-European allies who participated in the two-state solution conference and endorsed its final communique charting a path towards a Palestinian state alongside Israel. There are concerns over possible vindictive responses from Mr Trump, particularly if he feels isolated on the international stage. There is unease over his administration sanctioning the PA's leadership, which the latter says is a form of punishment for seeking the establishment of a Palestinian state. It shouldn't surprise anyone if Israel seeks to crush everything that emerged from the UN conference. It views the PA as an obstacle to its ambitions of annexing the West Bank. It opposes the near-unanimous international view that Hamas should be dismantled, only because its policy is to fracture Palestinian unity and undermine the PA. The dilemma facing the US President over the current Israeli government's extremist policies is his growing global isolation on the Palestine issue. He may still choose to ignore increasing international momentum in favour of a Palestinian state, but it could come at a cost. Indeed, it was no small development for Saudi Arabia to insist to the international community that it won't normalise relations with Israel unless a Palestinian state is established. Riyadh's support for Palestinian statehood gained greater significance when it co-chaired the conference with France. The event brought surprising developments, including the UK's readiness to recognise the state of Palestine at next month's UN General Assembly unless Israel changes course from its current approach in Gaza. Yet a Palestinian state cannot come into being without American backing and Israeli compliance. The UN Security Council has already enshrined the two-state solution in resolutions 1397 and 1515, both supported by Washington. But the roadmap they laid out for Palestinian statehood by 2005 was never implemented and the Trump administration walked back American commitments to those resolutions. The events in New York could push Mr Trump further into the arms of Israeli extremism and its rejection of the two-state solution. Or he might find himself cornered and unable to punish the broad coalition of states that have challenged him. If so, his policy could shift under pressure. This would require a deft diplomatic effort to present Mr Trump with ways to align with the emerging consensus without feeling provoked. Countries have bilateral interests and won't risk undermining relations with Washington solely for the sake of the two-state solution. Having been increasingly scrutinised by the international community, Israel appears intent on shifting global focus away from Gaza. This is precisely because it intends to continue its policies there. And as long as European states fail to impose tangible punitive measures on Israel, and as long as Mr Trump supports its project of 'voluntary displacement', Israel will continue with its agenda. Israel's posture towards Lebanon and Iran, however, is another matter. There is little international sympathy for Iran's insistence that Hezbollah retain its arms in defiance of Lebanese sovereignty. Nor is there sympathy for Tehran's reckless endangerment of the Lebanese people's safety, security and agency. There is, likewise, little global sympathy for the Islamic Republic's stubborn adherence to its triad of strategic doctrines – nuclear capability, ballistic missiles and proxy warfare – without modifications. Thus, should it once again face US or Israeli military strikes, it is unlikely to find many sympathisers. Tehran is now trapped by American sanctions and the threat of more air strikes. Hezbollah, too, will find no one rushing to its rescue if it falls prey to Israel's attempts to shift global attention away from Gaza. Both entities will have only themselves to blame.

Lebanon says four killed in Israeli strikes
Lebanon says four killed in Israeli strikes

Gulf Today

timea day ago

  • Gulf Today

Lebanon says four killed in Israeli strikes

Beirut: A series of Israeli air strikes killed four people in south and east Lebanon, the health ministry said Friday, referring to strikes that occurred the previous evening. 'The series of strikes launched by the Israeli enemy Thursday evening led to the death of four people,' the Lebanese health ministry said. The Israeli military said Thursday that it had targeted Hizbollah 'infrastructure that was used for producing and storing strategic weapons' in south Lebanon and the eastern Bekaa Valley. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz described one of the targets as Hizbollah's 'biggest precision missile manufacturing site'. More than a year of hostilities -- including two months of all-out war between Israel and Hizbollah which largely ended with a November ceasefire -- left the militant group badly weakened. Israel has nonetheless kept up near-daily air strikes in Lebanon despite the ceasefire, and has threatened to continue them until the group has been disarmed. 'Any attempt by the terrorist organisation to recover, re-establish or threaten will be met with relentless intensity,' Katz said on Thursday. Under the terms of the truce, Hizbollah was to withdraw its fighters north of the Litani river, about 30 kilometres (20 miles) from the Israeli border. Israel was meant to withdraw all its troops from Lebanon, but has kept them in five areas it deems strategic. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said Thursday that he was determined to disarm Hizbollah, a step it has come under heavy US pressure to take, despite the group's protests that doing so would serve Israeli goals. Hizbollah and Israel fought a two-month war last year that left the group badly weakened, though it retains part of its arsenal. Israel has kept up its air strikes on Hizbollah targets despite a November ceasefire, and has threatened to continue them until the group has been disarmed. In a speech on Thursday, Aoun said Beirut was demanding 'the extension of the Lebanese state's authority over all its territory, the removal of weapons from all armed groups including Hezbollah and their handover to the Lebanese army'. Agencies

Trump deploys nuclear submarines in row with Russia
Trump deploys nuclear submarines in row with Russia

Gulf Today

time2 days ago

  • Gulf Today

Trump deploys nuclear submarines in row with Russia

US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines Friday in an extraordinary escalation of what had been an online war of words with a Russian official over Ukraine and tariffs. Trump and Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia's security council, have been sparring on social media for days. Trump's post on his Truth Social platform abruptly took that spat into the very real -- and rarely publicized -- sphere of nuclear forces. "Based on the highly provocative statements," Trump said he had "ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that." "Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances," the 79-year-old Republican posted. The nuclear sabre rattling came against the backdrop of a deadline set by Trump for the end of next week for Russia to take steps to ending the Ukraine war or face unspecified new sanctions. Despite the pressure from Washington, Russia's onslaught against its pro-Western neighbor continues to unfold at full-bore. An AFP analysis Friday showed that Russian forces had fired a record number of drones at Ukraine in July. Russian attacks have killed hundreds of Ukrainian civilians since June. A combined missile and drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early Thursday killed 31 people, including five children, said rescuers. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has consistently rejected calls for a ceasefire, said Friday that he wants peace but that his demands for ending his nearly three-and-a-half year invasion were "unchanged". Those demands include that Ukraine abandon territory and end ambitions to join NATO. Insults, nuclear rhetoric Trump did not say in his post whether he meant nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed submarines. He also did not elaborate on the deployment locations, which are kept secret by the US military. The United States and Russia control the vast majority of the world's nuclear weaponry, and Washington keeps nuclear-armed submarines on permanent patrol as part of its so-called nuclear triad of land, sea and air-launched weapons. Trump also did not refer specifically to what Medvedev had said to prompt his order. Medvedev had criticised Trump on his Telegram account Thursday and alluded to the "fabled 'Dead Hand'" -- a reference to a highly secret automated system put in place during the Cold War to control the country's nuclear weapons. This came after Trump had lashed out at what he called the "dead economies" of Russia and India. Medvedev had also harshly criticized Trump's threat of new sanctions against Russia over Moscow's continuing invasion of Ukraine. Accusing Trump of "playing the ultimatum game," he posted Monday on X that Trump "should remember" that Russia is a formidable force. Trump responded by calling Medvedev "the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he's still President." Medvedev should "watch his words," Trump posted at midnight in Washington on Wednesday. "He's entering very dangerous territory!" Medvedev is currently deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council and a vocal proponent of Putin's war in Ukraine -- and generally antagonistic to relations with the West. He served as president between 2008-2012, effectively acting as a placeholder for Putin, who was able to circumvent constitutional term limits and remain in de facto power. The one-time reformer has rebranded over the years as an avid online troller, touting often extreme versions of official Kremlin nationalist messaging. His influence within the Russian political system remains limited. Agence France-Presse

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store