Qifa Nabki | A Lebanese Political Blog

I imagine that this video has gone viral by now, but if you have not yet seen it, make sure you do. It is only 13 minutes long.

High bandwidth version

Low bandwidth version, part 1

Low bandwidth version, part 2

The more time one spends on the website of Noor Holding, the firm that is allegedly developing Cedar Island, the more one begins to get the creeping suspicion that this is one of the most brilliant hoaxes pulled off in recent memory.

After all, their other projects include “Canadian Town”, a luxury full-service residence town 10 km from the Iraq International Airport. They include “the biggest chair in the world”, and a building in Kurdistan called Erbil Towers “comprised of five giant business and commercial towers embracing and illuminating the skies of Iraq and carrying the biggest word in the world, E R B I L.”

After scratching my head about this for a few minutes, I picked up the phone and called the number listed on the website. The fellow who answered assured me that it was real.

“The crazy cedar tree island is real?”

“Yes, of course.”

“The company is real? The enormous building shaped like a chair, and the Canadian Town near Baghdad airport? These are all happening?”

“Inshallah.”

Truth stranger than fiction?

—

UPDATE

I’ve just received heard from my contact in the Tourism Minister’s office that the project is, in fact, real. It was first floated (no pun intended) a few years ago, and is now gathering steam.

Contrary to what they suggest on their website, however, the project does not have a green light yet. It still needs Cabinet approval, and will likely require a law to be passed by the Parliament as well, just like the proposed Sannine ski resort. The development firm is in the process of lobbying MP’s and ministers on their views.

I’d guess that they began releasing publicity materials ahead of time so that they could build some buzz around the idea.

: : : : : : : : : : :

Once upon a time, I would scoff at those who suggested that Lebanon was becoming an appendage of the gaudy, godless Gulf. I’d roll my eyes as shrill Lebanese communists whined about Solidere, bitter Christians accused Hariri of confiscating Lebanon for the Sunnis, and hypocritical  socialites complained about Khaleeji tourists, while making money hand over fist, year after year.

Sure, I thought, Lebanon is getting a drastic face lift. Sure, our public debt is staggering, but this has a lot to do with corruption, reconstruction, and political instability. Yes, Beirut and its suburbs are becoming increasingly estranged from the rest of the country, with their opulent restaurants, mountain resorts, bars, beach clubs, and high-rises. But this, my friends, is the price of economic growth and prosperity, which in turn is the salve that will heal the wounds of war. You know…  a rising tide smushes all sand castles, or something like that.

Mostly however, I — like most Lebanese — detested comparisons between Beirut and Dubai. “You must be joking,” I’d spit, when well-meaning foreigners, eager to imply that they read the newspaper every now and then and could probably find Lebanon on a map, expressed their satisfaction that Beirut was rebuilding itself and may one day even look like Dubai.

“Dubai?!” I’d shriek. “That postmodern funhouse nightmare?!  That soulless tourist trap?! Beirut would never stoop so low!” Even as recently as a few days ago, I found myself grimacing while listening to Georges Corm complaining about the Dubai-ification of Lebanon, on a Sunday afternoon talk show.   “Come on, people,” I’d mentally chastise his listeners. “We may be flashy and superficial, but we’re not as bad as Dubai! Dubai spends tens of millions of dollars on fireworks displays! Dubai builds an indoor ski slope in the middle of the desert, just for kicks! Dubai builds the tallest skyscraper in the world even though there is no real reason to build multi-level structures when you are surrounded by miles of barren wasteland! Dubai built Palm Jebel Ali, the ridiculous housing development in the shape of a giant palm tree that can be seen from space.

Far from demonstrating such gauche sensibilities, we Lebanese have culture, history, and taste. We have cafes, newspapers, intellectuals, universities, people who speak Arabic, service taxis, Sayyed Hasan, Abou l-Abed, and Fairouz. How can we be Dubai? We’re Lebanon!”

That was then. This is now. We are Dubai, people. Take a look:

In case you can’t make sense of this picture, it’s an island in the shape of a huge cedar tree. Yes, that’s right, an island in the shape of a huge cedar tree. No, no… I said an island IN THE SHAPE OF A HUGE CEDAR TREE!!!!

If you find yourself checking a calendar to make sure that it’s not April Fools, please be assured: this is the real thing. Noor Holding, the developer, has announced that the $1 billion project has already been approved by the Lebanese President (Lahoud, not Sleiman, judging from the picture on their website), and will be completed by 2012.  It will feature all kinds of lovely amenities including a lagoon, fitness centers, shopping malls, a commercial district, and of course, plenty of room for luxury neighborhoods with views of the Mediterranean.

More pictures of this stunning feat of landscape engineering are available on the project website, whose design reminds me of a Cedar Wings magazine circa 1986.  As if to lend a sense of finality to the initiative, there’s even a fake webcam which is supposed to document the construction progress, which is slated to begin fairly soon off the coast of Damour, just south of Beirut International Airport.

Am I the last person to hear about this? Say it isn’t so!

So I was having dinner the other night at the home of J, a lovable Beiruti architect whose incredible tabbouleh depends on the secret ingredients of pomegranate molasses and sumac in its dressing.

Oops. Sorry J.

Anyway, the topic of conversation was Beirut’s recent annointment as one of forty-four  must-visit destinations for 2009, by The New York Times. And where did Beirut fall on that list of uber-trendy locales? That’s right. Number one, baby.  We remain hip, interesting, and newsworthy, may God be praised.

Amidst much self-congratulatory clinking of araq glasses, J sat back and said happily: “Well, I suppose this means that we will get at least one summer of stability.”

Beat.

“What do you mean, J?”

“I mean, if The New York Times said it’s ok to visit Lebanon, then this means that the U.S. is not planning any more adventures, right?”

“Come again?”

J continued, unaware of my befuddlement: “But the thing that bothers me about this is that they are sending mixed messages. I mean, why issue a travel advisory to Lebanon, and then say that you should Lebanon, at the same time?”

“Umm, J? The New York Times did not issue the travel advisory. The U.S. government did.”

“I know.”

“So… one thing is not connected with the other. The U.S. government does not coordinate its policies with the media. They are two separate things altogether.”

J looked at me as if I had suddenly started speaking in Swedish.

“But surely they talk to each other.”

“J, the job of newspapers is to interrogate and investigate the actions of government, not to justify and enable them.”

Actually, I didn’t say that. I started to, but then stopped. I’m still not sure why.

Everybody is talking about Obama’s need to engage Syria.

The pro-engagement crowd has grown beyond the initial cadre of Arab-friendly analysts and now includes taste-makers and heavy hitters who have the ear of the President: people like Martin Indyk, Richard Haass, and others. Only a year ago, when Syria Comment and Creative Forum hosted discussions about Syrian-Israeli peace, one could hardly help feeling that the initiative was promising but ultimately destined for the garbage heap of failed negotiations, due to the fact that the U.S. was displaying zero interest in getting involved. Today, by contrast, it seems as if there isn’t a single analyst besides the Charles Krauthammer types who does not believe that the United States should get behind Syria-Israel in a big way. Fantastic! There’s just one problem: the talks are off, thanks to Gaza.

It is extremely difficult to see the way forward, under the current conditions. There is so much obstructing the view, both on the ground and in the air. On the ground lie the ruins of Gaza, the ruins of Palestinian leadership, the ruins of Arab unity, the ruins of ’indirect’ negotiations. In the air float the results of upcoming Israeli elections, Lebanese elections, and Iranian elections, all of which make it well nigh impossible to plot the course ahead.   

All of this uncertainty works in the favor of Syria, which is well-positioned to reap the benefits of a new engagement policy should Obama and Clinton choose to pull the trigger. While the war in Gaza may or may not have weakened Hamas politically, it has surely strengthened Syria, at least for the time being. When George Mitchell sits down to figure out how to make Fatah and Hamas reconcile, the Egyptians and Jordanians will have less leverage than ever before. Bashar has been biding his time very patiently, waiting for George W. Bush to depart, precisely to have a new American president come to the time-honored conclusion that “there is no peace without Syria”.  For its part, however, Syria cannot afford to play hard-to-get. The Obama administration will likely make an early and subtle overture towards Damascus, and when Washington comes calling, Bashar should answer loud and clear. If he plays the ‘raise-the-price’ game, it could all slip away and the anti-engagement crowd will spend the rest of Obama’s tenure saying “I told you so.”

Turkey, Qatar, Dubai, etc. are helping Syria for one reason: they also fear Iran, but they think that the Iranian threat is best contained by gradually pulling Syria back into the Arab/Western orbit, rather than by encouraging Israel and the U.S. to try to weaken Syria, Hizbullah, and Hamas. If Syria — like its allies — is also sincerely looking for a way to move closer to the West, then it needs to seize the hand extended by Obama. Furthermore, it needs to do this in a very decisive and public fashion, or else all of those who have no interest in re-starting a serious peace process will find a way to shoot this initiative down. Bashar cannot afford to let the mountain come to Muhammad. He needs to meet it halfway.

That’s right, you heard me. A Nasrallah rosary. It was only a matter of time before somebody put a picture of the Sayyed on one. Such is the equal-opportunity appeal of Hizbulah’s chief in Lebanon that many Christians place him in the same pantheon as St. George,  St. Maron, St. Anthony…

Ok, I exaggerate, but only slightly.

Apparently someone is selling rosaries which include, along with the usual lineup of haloed saints’ faces on them, an image of Sayyed Hasan’s turbaned head. Kind of brilliant. Just the perfect blend of religion and politics that makes for a nasty case of knickerus twistosa, here in the Paris of the Middle East.

Naim Qassem was interviewed by Maggie Farah on OTV’s “al-Haqq Yuqal” talk show last night. Held in a secret location, with Maggie’s smoldering eyes peering out from under a scanty lace headscarf, the Hizb’s deputy secretary-general pinned the blame for producing the rosaries on the Lebanese Forces.

I have yet to get my hands on one. Anybody seen them?

Joshua Landis, over at Syria Comment, has a new post entitled “Will Syria Benefit From Syria’s Invasion of Gaza”. In it, he argues that “the ‘moderates’ are moderate because they have no conflict with Israel. The radicals are radical because they do… Syria is compelled to fan the flames of hatred and violence because it calculates — and perhaps correctly — that only militant passions can win back their land and restore lost dignity.”

Bashar al-Assad suspended all talks with Israel following the invasion of Gaza. Syria is now demanding that a high-level international conference be convened under Obama’s stewardship to find a comprehensive solution to the problem. What if the U.S. responds favorably? Bashar has insisted that Hamas be taken seriously as a major regional actor along with Hizbullah, and has refused to cut ties with these allies. Does this mean that Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Iranians would attend a peace conference organized by the Obama adminstration?

If all Syria (and its allies) want is a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T, why not call the bluff (if that’s what Israel and its allies think it is)? What do they have to lose?

Naive questions await cynical answers…

Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar carried a report today about the surprise reconcilliation that took place at the Kuwait summit yesterday. It claims that Saudi King Abdullah’s speech came out of the blue and was unexpected by Hosni Mubarak, who remained “cold” towards Bashar al-Assad, and then got on his plane and left. What’s more, the Akhbar report suggests that the mood of “openness” initiated by Abdullah did not translate into any breakthroughs during the closed-door meetings between the various envoys and ministers present. Everybody is still sticking to their guns: the Syrians want to cancel the Arab Peace Initiative while the Saudis are insisting that doing so leaves the Arabs with no serious alternative vis-a-vis Israel.

I wonder what Bashar and Abdullah are discussing in that photograph… “Now you see, your Highness, what I meant by “half-men” was not what you thought at all! I was making a simple observation about the differences in physical appearance between my rather lanky stature and your own well-proportioned self… and of course President Mubarak and King Abdullah II as well…”

I was at a party last night when someone dropped a bombshell in the middle of a conversation.

“It’s really too bad about The Daily Star, isn’t it?”

“What do you mean?”

“They’re going bust. Such a shame.”

“WHAT?!”

This report was confirmed by another person listening in on the conversation. “Haven’t you heard,” they asked. “Last Thursday was their last day.” My mood instantly darkened, and I went home early. This morning, I came to work and immediately checked the newspaper’s website. Lo and behold! Staring back at me from my computer screen were the vaguely familiar headlines that said it all: old news…

I spent the next half hour thinking through the implications of this turn of events. Perhaps almost as remarkable to me as the news of the alleged bankruptcy was the degree to which I was disturbed by it. I was actually rather surprised by how upset it made me feel to hear that The Daily Star, that old fixture of the anglophone Lebanese community, the perennial employment standby for visiting journalism majors and wandering NGO part-timers, was closing its doors.

“They were going bust when I worked there, years ago,” said a friend as she nursed her drink. “I’m not surprised by it. It’s managed chaotically.”

The result of my brooding was the revelation that The Daily Star, for all of its flaws, performs a role that cannot easily be filled by another institution. Even setting aside the fact that it is the only Lebanese daily published in English, the Star strikes me as unique in the generally even-handed character of its coverage. Unlike pretty much all of the other Lebanese papers (with occasional exceptions of course), The Daily Star plays host to a wide range of perspectives, and its editorial line is not so easy to pin down. More often than not, I find myself rolling my eyes as I flip through the pages of an-Nahar, as-Safir, and even al-Akhbar, due to the ideological intransigence and bias of their journalists. The Daily Star’s op-eds and reports are typically more balanced, surely the mark of a good newspaper.

I awoke from my gloomy day dream with the idea that I should probably give the newspaper a call to confirm the rumor before penning its obit. (Imagine the millions who’d take to the streets in mourning promptly after reading my blog, right?) I picked up the phone and called the Gemmayzeh offices. Someone answered after several long rings.  

“So I hear that you’re closing.”

“That’s incorrect.”

“Really? Phew…”

“Yeah.”

“So… how come you’re not circulating a paper then?”

“Our printing press is broken. We’re fixing it.”

“Oh, ok. Well that’s a relief, right?”

“Yes.”

“Ok, well… bye.”

In the meantime, I’d received an email from a friend who suggested a different explanation of the rumor. The Star’s printing press was not busted: rather, its assets have been frozen because someone is suing them, and they are trying to work out some kind of deal. Any more insights? Please advise.

(Somewhere in the Gulf, the editor of another English daily whose goal is to “reinforce Abu Dhabi’s status as … a political, cultural and social leader of the Arab world” can only be rubbing his hands together and cackling happily.)

Talal Salman had an editorial in today’s as-Safir, in which he rightly criticized the three summits called by the Arabs in support of Gaza. “Sale! Three for the price of one,” he mocked.

I am so tired of the stupid “Arab Cold War”, and we’re only, what, five years into it? Is there some way to fast forward? I really do think I’ve seen this terrible movie before.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia want to curtail Iran’s encroaching influence while the “resistance” axis does not want to see Egypt broker a truce with Hamas at its expense.  Everybody is trying to throw their own “look-at-how-important-I-am” party, but only their friends are showing up. Bah humbug. What’s the point of being important if the people whom you deem as unimportant don’t recognize you as important?

Meanwhile, innocents die.