Notes on Kanaan’s death
A few quick notes from a busy day:
Nick Blanford, one of the best Beirut-based foreign correspondents, give his two cents here, and concludes:
“I have just been talking to a very prominent Damascus analyst, who predicts that Kanaan will be blamed for the Hariri assassination.
“This would lift the international pressure off the Syrian regime, and avoid the risk that Kanaan might launch a coup backed by the US and take over the presidency.”
Blanford also has a story here, in which he gives this handy clarifications over the radio interview Kanaan gave a few hours before his death:
On Tuesday night, the New TV channel broadcast allegations that General Kanaan had admitted to Mr Mehlis that he had amassed millions of dollars during his “reign in Lebanonâ€.
“Premier Hariri had at the time given me a $10 million cheque,†New TV quoted General Kanaan as saying in his testimony to the UN investigators. “We were making money from Premier Hariri so how could we possibly kill him and close the flow of his riches?†Yesterday morning General Kanaan spoke to the Voice of Lebanon radio station to reject the allegations aired the previous evening.
Robert Fisk has the usual “I, Robert Fisk, knew Ghazi Kanaan” article, but you have to pay for it.
L’Orient Le Jour starts its piece on Kanaan today with some rather amusing phrasing: “Did he commit suicide? Was he forced to commit suicide? Was he ’suicided’?”
The article’s author, Michel Georgiou, then continues to mock the Syrian official position on Kanaan’s death:
Some in Damascus have described, with obvious bad faith that at times is close to burlesque, a man “eaten by anxiety on the future of Lebanon.” Perhaps instead they should blame Kanaan’s “suicide” on fear of the avian flu, which, having already reached Turkey, is knocking at Syria’s door.
Georgiou then goes to examine the possibility of Kanaan having spilt the beans to the Mehlis enquiry, and his suicide being a way out of the Hariri scandal for the Syrian regime who can then blame him.
Ghazi Kanaan may have become the perfect example of a scapegoat–the ideal suspect since he can no longer defend himself–by which the Syrian regime hopes to buy its salvation in the 14 February affair, or at least remain in purgatory. But does the sacrifice of one man suffice to absolve an entire regime?
There is a lot of analysis and reporting taking place on this issue, but not much that is bringing actually new information. Le Monde’s article today adds a little bit more:
D’autres font état de divergences au sein de l’appareil de pouvoir syrien, dont Ghazi Kanaan devait, entre autres personnalités, faire les frais : il devait être écarté du ministère pour un poste “protocolairement plus important” , mais qui est en fait une voie de garage, rapporte un diplomate. I
Translation: Others speak of schism at the heart of the Syrian regime, which Ghazi Kanaan among others were to bear the brunt of: he was to be moved out of the ministry in favor of a “by protocol, more important” post that was in fact a kick upstairs, according to a diplomat.
Josh of Syria Comment says:
One good reporter I heard from today said they are “hearing Kanaan was tried in-camera and executed.”
I have to wonder, though, that if Kanaan knew it was coming, why did they let him give out his “final statement” to Voice of Lebanon? Anyway, he has a lot more on this.
Categories: Syria.
Blandford’s analyst sounds suspiciously like … the ubiquitous Josh Landis.
If I remember well, Mr Amrani, you first blamed the Maronites for Hariri’s assassination.
Don’t believe everything you read on foaming-at-the-mouth Martin Kramer lapdog CampusWatch footsoldier blogs.
My record stands on this: if you read that original post, it’s quite a stretch to say that I say Maronites were behind it just because I consider the possibility. In fact, even today I still think it’s quite plausible that Emile Lahoud (a Maronite backed by some of the pro-Syria Maronite community, even if it is a minority) or someone in his entourage could have had something to do with this, with or without the Syrians. Let’s wait for the Mehlis report to come out and things will presumably be set straight.
In the meantime, I don’t particularly like having people with a political agenda accusing me of saying things which I didn’t say. Like many people at the time and now, I am simply dumbfounded that Syria could have done something as stupid as assassinate Hariri, and continue to believe that if it was the Syrians a “rogue” operation by the likes of Ghazaleh is more probable than a direct order from Bashar Al Assad. People tend to forget that this is as much an internal Lebanese affair as a Syrian-Lebanese affair.
Aren’t several of the folks who were arrested Maronites?
I’d appreciate your leaving my name out of your back-and-forth. I never speculated about Hariri’s assassination, or commented on the speculations of others. I find Issandr El Amrani’s gratuitous insult to be grossly offensive.
Mr. Kramer, while I find the kind of academic monitoring activities that you back and some of your points of view grossly offensive, this “insult” was not directed at you but at one of your more sycophantic fans and CampusWatch colleagues. Moreover, since you are an influential “public intellectual,” I think you better get used to having your ideas and the company you keep debated in public forums such as this one.
To clarify things, however, I fully recognize that to my knowledge you have never commented on my blog in general or on my speculation on the Hariri murder in particular.
I believe that the ultimate goal of Hariri’s murder is regime change in Syria.
Is Israel not very adamant about Syria’s change of politics, especially concerning the alleged housing of supposed terrorists ?
The impartiality of Mr. Mehlis is quite dubious: as a German he appars rather favourably biased in favour of Israel.
Naming the members of the late Mr. Assad’s old guard as his prime suspects he ensures the vacating of their positions - to be filled with pro-American puppets.
It is a bloodless coup d’etat.
Maybe Mr. Assad jun. should leave with them. As an ophtalmologist he could get a medical license to practice medicine in America - the Americans are as blind as the ones who don’t want to see.
We should not forget poor, murdered Ghazi Kanaan.
Both is murder: to be directly killed and to be driven into a seeming suicide
Was he not the crucial liaison for Hezb-Allah and Palestinians in Lebanon ? I would not be surprised if the Israelis hated him.
Maybe he had certain principles after all, such that he did not allow himself to be corrupted by Israel and America.
It rather seems that all major politicians thrive on corruption. Our latest role models in this regard, Mr. Bush & Co. come to mind.
If Kanaan had standarts that he could not be corrupted by everyone then he is a noteworthy exception - he probably had a force of character that could not be broken by ordinary threats. And so he was murdered.
If we look at both Syrai and Lebanon the Israels gain the most:
After the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon she is more vulnerable to outside interference now - Israel is crazed about annexing the Golan Heights and the Sheeba Valley.
The convenient bloodless coup d’etat in Syria is certainly highly appreciated, too.
I want to know what the Mossad had on her schedule on the days of both murders.
PS:
Can you please give a link to a website where I can listen to Kanaan’s audio ? I have the transcript but I want to know what his voice sounded like - does the sound of his voice match the text ?