March 14, 1989, the day "the general" declared his "war of liberation" against Syria and its Lebanese allies, including the war that he waged against the Lebanese Forces Christian militia for control of the Christian stronghold, "Napolaoun's" megalomania has cost the Lebanese, and in particular the Christians, thousands of dead and wounded and resulted in material damage that, for much of the area, exceeds that previously caused by the whole series of wars in Lebanon since 1975.
As for results, this carnage produced absolutely nothing. Aoun was unable to achieve a single one of his declared objectives, for the simple reason that in the context of the existing relationship of were unachievable. In this Aoun and Saddam Hussein, which have brought them to support each other, illustrate perfectly the saying that "birds of a feather flock together."
Both men share inordinate ambition and a total disregard for the human cost of their adventures, such as the Iraqi dictator's war against Iran. However, the relations they established cannot be explained simply by elective affinities. They represented first of all an alliance against a common enemy - Syria.
It was the same desire to take on Syria that impelled the Mitterrand government to support Aoun, at a time when, moreover, France was still an ally of Iraq. Official French support was toned down, however, when in the summer of 1989 the Saudi monarchy and the other holders of the Gulf petro-dollars came up with the Taef accords (named for a Saudi town), which were supposed to put an end to the war in Lebanon.
The new Lebanese president, Elias Hrawi, chosen on the basis of these accords by the survivors of the Lebanese parliament elected in 1972 (!), was recog28 nized by all the great powers and the Arab states, except Iraq.
Syria, however, had to temporize a bit before going into action against Michel Aoun, who had become an outlaw in the eyes of "international law." France and Iraq - the former semi-officially, and the latter officially — continued to protect the Lebanese Don Quixote.
United States warns Syria
Although the United States had broken with him, it nonetheless warned Syria against intervening militarily inside the Christian stronghold. Furthermore, after the Taef accords, Damascus could not but look favorably on the battle within the redoubt between Aoun's army and the Lebanese Forces backed by Israel.
This battle was more violent than all those that the reactionary Christian camp had waged against its enemies. It ended in a deadlock. In the meantime, Syria did not hesitate to cynically provide aid to the "general"— nor did the latter turn it down, in return changing his tone toward those against whom just previously he had been waging his "war of liberation."
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait on August 2, created ideal conditions in more than one respect for decisive Syrian action against Michel Aoun. Under blockade, Iraq was in no position to support him.
Moreover, in joining the AmericanSaudi camp against its sworn enemy Saddam Hussein, the Syrian dictator, Hafez el-Assad, knew that he could get a action in Lebanon, an exporter of terrorism and not oil. This, moreover, was only a part of Syria's reward for its participation in the blockade against Iraq and the crusade against Saddam Hussein, support which is essential to the overall
Against the background of the blockade of Iraq, Syria and its protege Hrawi at first went for a blockade of the zone controlled by Aoun. Then, on October 13, they launched a military offensive that in two hours led to the capitulation
ÇOOO! PLANTu of "Napolaoun," who had continually sworn that he would rather die than give way. Advice from Paris undoubtedly did as much as the fighting to lead him to his ignominious total surrender. The French government told him that the most they were prepared to do for him was to save his skin by granting him political asylum.
Aoun, who is known to have put tens of millions of dollars in foreign accounts in his own and his wife's names, preferred the prospect of a gilded exile to the "heroic" death for which he had claimed to be ready. Unfortunately for him, the Lebanese government, pushed by Damascus, is not going along with this.
### Aoun's stolen millions
As a precondition for letting him go, it is demanding the return of the millions that he has diverted to his personal accounts. In this test of strength between Paris and Beirut, Damascus wants to take advantage of the most favorable conjuncture it has ever enjoyed in the region to settle old scores with the French establishment, which is unanimously hostile to
Whatever the outcome of this last vicissitude of the Aoun chapter of the Lebanese war, the war itself is not about to end. Aoun's exit will be followed by many more entries. The disarmament of the militias provided for by the Taef accords will only be another repetition of the same old farce. The Israeli deterrent will prevent the Syrians from deploying sufficient forces in Lebanon to disarm the country's belligerent factions. The latter will remain very numerous, armed to the teeth and always ready to kill each other in combinations defying all prediction.
Lebanon is condemned for a long time to remain the theater for settling all the region's scores, plus the local objectives ot its various militias.
The future of Lebanon in the long term will depend primarily on what happens in Syria itself. *
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
LEBANON Exit Aoun... as "the general," aptly dubbed ITS NICE HERE, BUT I'M AFRAIO THE VIEW ISNT VERY