Untitled Document
When the main witnesses recant, you don't have a case
The effort to demonize Syria and, in effect, Saddamize
its ruler, Bashar
al-Assad, has run up against a brick wall: the recantation
of the prime witness, who says he was bribed, intimidated, and tortured into
going along with the narrative
being sold by UN prosecutor
Mehlis – that Syrian intelligence pulled off the
Feb. 14 assassination of Lebanese entrepreneur and politician Rafik
Hariri in Beirut. The New York Times reports:
"Hussam Taher Hussam, said he had been held in Lebanon by supporters
of Saad Hariri, the son of the former prime minister, and subjected to torture
and drug injections to force him to testify. Saad Hariri, he said, offered
him $1.3 million if he would lie about senior Syrian officials. …
"He said Mr. Hariri and his associates had asked him to tell investigators
that he had seen a truck used in the assassination at a Syrian military camp,
and to present false evidence implicating Maher Assad, the younger brother
of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, and Asef Shawkat, the president's brother-in-law,
in the killing in February."
Hussam's statement on Syrian television was well-received in Syria, where
his references to the vagaries of Alawite
minority rule and other details gave it added credibility. Naturally, Syria's
enemies rejected this new testimony, just as they had hailed Hussam's previous
statements as proof positive
of Syria's perfidy. What they didn't – couldn't – acknowledge was
that their chief witness is effectively discredited, and he
isn't the only one. As the various threads of the "Syria did it"
scenario unravel, the whole conspiracy theory is coming apart like a badly made
sweater.
In the Mehlis report – or at least the "preliminary" and highly
speculative document released last month – Hussam was the "masked"
witness whose identity supposedly could not be revealed because his life
was in danger from the Syrian authorities. His "evidence" was the
key link in tying the highest echelons of the Syrian regime to Hariri's
assassination. That he has now shown
up on Syrian television – looking presentable, sounding articulate,
and showing no signs of having been intimidated or even having a single hair
on his head ruffled – has the anti-Syria crowd looking pretty silly. Even
worse for them, however, is the news that yet another prominent figure in the
narrative woven by Mehlis, Muhammad Zuhayr al-Sadiq, has also been discredited.
According to an article
in Le Figaro, a French right-of-center daily associated with the party
of Jacques Chirac, the CIA described al-Sadiq as a "fabulist." French
intelligence was all too aware of the witness' unreliability but ignored the
CIA's skepticism due to political pressure from on high. Mehlis himself didn't
believe Sadiq, at least in the beginning, and, according to Le Figaro's
reporter, the UN's chief investigator used Sadiq's testimony as a "bluff"
to enable the detention of the four Lebanese generals in hopes that they would
incriminate themselves. The German newspaper Der
Spiegel gives us even
more reason to question Sadiq's testimony: they
report that he was introduced to Mehlis by Rifaat
al-Assad, brother of the late President Hafez al-Assad, who hopes
to inherit the Syrian presidency if and when the Americans invade.
One mysterious reference in the Le Figaro story: a "member of
the entourage of Saad Hariri" is cited as saying that Sadiq was used to
convey information that came from "elsewhere." Der
Spiegel also reported
Sadiq told his brother in Damascus that "I've
become a millionaire" as a result of his testimony – with the
money coming, presumably, from that same "elsewhere."
As for Mehlis, he is apparently so sick and tired of this endless probe that
he's retiring
from the scene having undergone a surprising transformation: he's no longer
the stern, no-nonsense Teutonic prosecutor, a Germanic version of Patrick
J. Fitzgerald, but shamefaced and subdued in the face of this massive debunking
of his "preliminary" report. What a comedown!
That report had been a major
bludgeon for the Bush administration and their newfound allies, the
French, to hit Syria over the head with in
the UN Security Council, and it served the same purpose on
the home front: yet more evidence that it was high time for the imposition
of sanctions and a little "regime
change" in Damascus. The discrediting of Hussam and Sadiq has deprived
the War Party of this particular weapon, but they aren't giving up: UN Ambassador
John Bolton is demanding that the Mehlis investigation be continued,
even without Mehlis.
The official end date of the UN investigation
into Hariri's assassination is Dec. 15, but you can be sure that Bolton and
the rest of the get-Syria
crowd will try to ensure that its life span is extended. They are determined
to gin up another war, and they don't care how transparently
false the pretext is: these people have raised lying into a sophisticated
art form, of which the Mehlis propaganda blitz is just the beginning. They
don't care how far-fetched the indictments of their targets appear, nor how
often they are debunked: what they're counting on is the residue left by "news"
stories trumpeting "evidence" that Syria killed Hariri and is wreaking
havoc in Lebanon. The debunking takes place on the back pages, while the initial
charges were given front-page headlines.
This is how the propaganda assault works: keep flinging dirt in the hope that
at least some of it will stick. If your "evidence" turns out to be
false, and your "witnesses" start recanting, then don't backpedal
– instead, invent new charges. Attack, attack, attack!
The utter absurdity of UN
Security Council resolution 1363 – which calls on Syria to cooperate
fully with an international commission investigating the assassination of former
Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri or face possible "further action"
– can be easily seen if we imagine that the UN had taken a similar interest
in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Picture Lyndon Baines Johnson
and top members of the U.S. government being called in by a United Nations "prosecutor"
for questioning. It's interesting that the same American "conservatives"
who waste
no opportunity to show their disdain for the UN and would have risen in
armed revolt if the UN had intervened in the Kennedy affair, are now upholding
the UN's authority to "investigate" the murder of Hariri and pin
it on Syria.
Syria is now girding for the imposition of economic sanctions
and trying to head off the campaign to destabilize the country on two fronts:
by restarting
talks with Israel, and by cooperating
with the request to permit Syrian officials to be questioned in the Hariri investigation.
I have the funny feeling, however, that this is not going to do them a lot of
good, as far as their enemies in the West are concerned. As
we have seen in the case of Iraq, when the U.S. wants to manufacture
a case for war, it can be done pretty easily: Congress is not
likely to ask inconvenient questions until it's too late, and the American
people can hardly be expected to keep up with arcane doings in faraway Lebanon,
the scene of the intrigue and obscure religious-ethnic rivalries that could
spark another Mideast war. Acting pretty much without either congressional or
public scrutiny, this administration thinks it can get away with anything when
it comes to Syria – and in that, they are probably right.
The scenario laid out by the War Party is this: pin the murder of Hariri
on Syria, concoct phony "evidence" that high Syrian officials –
including members of President Assad's immediate family – were involved,
and set up an "international tribunal" under the jurisdiction of the
UN, which will then demand that Syria surrender the accused – or else.
U.S. troops are waiting just across the Syrian-Iraqi border,
ready for the command to cross in full force – or perhaps as part
of a scouting expedition in hot pursuit of "terrorists," who will
then be set upon by Syrian troops in a Middle Eastern remake of the
Tonkin Gulf incident.
Coming soon to a theater of war near Iraq…