In a dangerous precedent, Lebanese President Michel Aoun settled the controversy over the August 4 earthquake; getting ahead of the judicial investigator and local and international investigations, he declared that is it “impossible” for the massive blast at the Beirut Port to have been the result of a Hezbollah weapons depot exploding, adding that the party “did not store weapons at the port.”
The laughable aspect here is that his verdict on this sensitive issue came before the missing buried under the rubble of Beirut Port had been found. Its remain a political, not a judicial verdict, as it got ahead of the findings of the French investigators and the FBI, and ignored the crucial facts of the case that have been disclosed, starting from the date at which the shipment of death arrived and leading up to and ending with the destruction of Beirut on August 4, the day a war crime was committed against the capital, its people and its inhabitants, all of them.
Everything we know so far shows that those responsible for all the bloodshed and the destruction and material losses, which are far higher than that of the July war, are liable to far more than administrative-security accountability alone.
Also drolly, the settling of the issue preceded the Special Tribunal for Lebanon’s verdict on Rafik Hariri’s assassination, a conclusion that provided an exemplar when it broke with a long period during which blame for major political crimes was restricted to anonymity. The murderers evaded justice. These heinous crimes were invested in to further major political projects that subjugated the country to foreign domination, first that of the Syrian regime and then the Iranian regime.
Much will be said about the Special Tribunal’s verdict, and much will be written. The constant is the consolidation of the tribunal’s legitimacy and the attenuation of the smear campaigns and accusations that it is politicized and not to be relied on. The verdict, with the undeniable evidence that was provided, affirmed that the crime had been committed for political reasons. Political factions with experience in committing acts that fall under the category of terrorism stood behind it. The court left no room for doubt when it found that the Syrian regime and Hezbollah had motives for committing the crime and even ascertained that the decision to physically liquidate was made after the Bristol Conference, which demanded the withdrawal of the Syrian regime’s army from Lebanon.
The tribunal also ascertained the precise role played by each of the accused, from Mustafa Badreddine, a prominent Hezbollah military commander who is said to have been killed in Syria and thus was not charged, to the four others who were accused. Only one of the armed group’s commanders, Salim Ayyash, was found guilty after the court did not find evidence presented against his comrades, Oneissi, Merhi and Sabra, sufficiently compelling, and it is known that the absence of the precisely needed proof does not imply its absence.
For this reason, the tribunal clarified that this operation demanded a great deal of resources and capabilities, thereby ruling out the possibility that it had been perpetrated by a lone wolf. Instead, it ascertained that the operation had required the collaboration of a group of individuals who are members of a fully-fledged, highly capable organization that is not easily penetrable. It goes on to ascertain that Ayyash was not alone and had been assisted by a reliable group, which proves that Hezbollah cadres formed the network that carried out the operation.
The judicial verdict, which took all these years to reach, was justified by evidence that leaves no room for doubt and undeniable proof, not political by analysis.
Whatever has been said, the ruling did require all the time and money that had been spent. This would not have happened had it not been for the total lack of justice in Lebanon, after the judiciary had been subjugated by the corrupt ruling regime. This state remains unchanged to this day, and Baabada Palace’s confiscation of judicial appointments is the latest manifestation. This verdict changed the course of history that had been taken since 1975, wherein the perpetrators of major crimes are left anonymous. The decision affirmed it is better to receive justice late than never, and that the era of plucking out the country’s great men, such as Kamal Jumblatt, Rene Mouwwad, Mufti Hassan Khaled, and others, to impose political directives, is no longer possible.
This is precisely how Lebanon should deal with the genocidal crime that destroyed half of Beirut and had catastrophic repercussions from which Lebanon will not quickly recover.
The tragic event that took only a few minutes to unfold will remain in people’s hearts. Realistically, no one will be capable of going back to their normal lives or even merely continuing to abide by the restrictions imposed by the epidemic! Therefore, there is no alternative to demanding full transparency and serious accountability. This would slightly compensate those who paid the high price, especially since Lebanon is now in the midst of an existential phase characterized by extreme tensions between the majority of the Lebanese and the ruling mafia!
Those who rose furiously in the aftermath of the Beirut blast insisted on justice, rejecting a local investigation and demanding a joint or international probe. This demand stems from the conviction that the Lebanese judiciary, which does not have all of the required investigative tools, has lost its independence, and many in the judiciary fear retaliation. The assassination of judges on court benches more than twenty years ago has not left their memory.
The investigation into this crime against humanity needs to expose the entire scenario of the ship of death, from who is responsible for seizing its cargo to unloading it in warehouse No. 12; It must expose those who were part of the poorly devised cover-up of the presence of a deadly pillow under people’s heads by looking into internal correspondences that were of no effect.
State Security has revealed that since the 3rd of last June, the Prime Minister has known of the details, along with the ministers of defense and labor. Then, on July 20, Aoun and Diab received a detailed memo warning of the danger threatening to destroy Beirut, but no one took action to save the capital and the lives of its residents!
The investigation is called upon to go back to the date of February 21, 2014, the day Colonel Joseph Skaf wrote to the Ministry of Finance’s Smuggling, Inspection and Search Agency demanding that the ship “RHOSUS”, loaded with 2,750 tons of “ammonium nitrate” be removed from the port.
This has cost him his life after he was subsequently treacherously murdered, and his family has been waiting for years to learn the details of the crime! The question was, why wasn’t the shipment returned to its owner, only for it to become clear that there was no known owner... so the real owner kept quiet, but he is being covered!
And because the special tribunal has demonstrated its high degree of credibility and ended the era of political crimes going unpunished, it is unacceptable to insist on covering it up with a local investigation, even if Hezbollah is behind it. Just as the court has proven that the assassination of ex-Prime Minister Hariri is a link in the broader chain of control and subjugation, the majority of the Lebanese consider the crime of August 4 to be the most significant link in the plan to tighten the Iranian hegemony of Lebanon. Thus, there is no alternative to adhering to an international investigation because it is the only way to achieve justice for the Lebanese!
