There are times when naming names becomes inevitable because any reluctance to do so, whether in the name of diplomacy, politics or any other consideration, may terribly discredit the hesitant party and hurt the victims of harmful maneuvering, be they innocent civilians in Palestine or an entire generation in Lebanon. There are times when entrusted mediators or self-proclaimed backchannels have to act according to their consciences under a moral and political responsibility that obliges them to name things as they are. There are times when accountability becomes inevitable because turning a blind eye, shifting blame, accepting an imposed status quo, or giving in to games aiming at buying time and eluding obligations can be costly for all concerned parties. 

The list of those who should be confronted and demanded to end excess today bears several names:

* The Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak who is lusting to get even with the Palestinians whom he believes were responsible for sabotaging the opportunity he had to enter history in the Camp David and Taba negotiations and stripping him of premiership to hand it over to Ariel Sharon. Today, Barak is getting ready to inflict a “collective punishment” on Palestinian civilians in revenge, while negotiating with Syria through backchannels to retrieve Syrian influence and control back into Lebanon as part of a regional deal that combines the fictitious hope of separating Syria and Iran and the anticipation that Syria can be preserved as a sponsor of radical organizations to weaken the Palestinian Authority. 

* Nabih Berri, Lebanon’s Speaker who has abducted the democratic process and turned the parliament from a democratic institution into a commodity serving narrow personal, financial and political interests. Berri has repeatedly obstructed the democratic process by practically refusing to open the gates of parliament to hold electoral sessions. He is abusing his authority as speaker and jeopardizing the future of Lebanon while obstructing Arab and international mediation efforts with calculations, equations, and formulas dictated by Damascus. It is time to hold Berri directly accountable for his actions, especially that many others are aware of various means to hold him accountable, even legally.

* The entire ruling power in Iran - and not just President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad - must see a serious Arab stance informing it that its escalations are claiming Palestinians who fall victims of the bitter occupation and are equally worsening the Palestinian humanitarian plight. Hence, it has become essential to name things as they are with respect to the service that suspicious radical forces are offering to Israel. 

* Damascus which buys and sells in the name of the “resistance”, avoiding and evading its responsibility while flirting with Israel through different channels. Damascus uses Palestinian factions to weaken the Palestinian Authority position against Israel. It is neither ready to launch serious resistance against Israel in a manner that would engage the Syrian front, nor is it willing to end its maneuvers that weaken the Palestinian Authority that has adopted the path of negotiation as a means to establish a Palestinian state. It is therefore time to name things as they are, to disclose the roles played by the Syrian regime in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq to the detriment of the Palestinians, Lebanese and Iraqis, and against the Arab interest in general. 

* Washington, which blindly sides with Israel, awakes every seven years toward the end of the presidential term in search for a historic accomplishment the outgoing president can add to his resume by establishing the Arab-Israeli peace. Anyone who knows the ABCs of the Middle East crisis is aware that all that is needed is an American bold step, whether at the administration, government or congress level, to demand Israel to stop evading peace and its obligations. As long as Washington lacks the courage to harness its influence with Israel to this end, it will continue to play with fire, not only in terms of the impact another American failure will have on moderate powers in the region, but also in terms of endangering American national interests. 

* So is the case with Europe, Russia and the United Nations, which all constitute the so-called “Quartet” tasked with resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. Each of these parties possesses multiple elements and tools to pressure various players. These parties now face a moral responsibility to stop maneuvering by merely contenting with simple meetings and statements here and there. If Israel truly plans to reoccupy Gaza, then the keys to halt such an incursion lie in the hands of Russia, Europe and China, not only in the hands of the US. 

* The Arab-Islamic radicalism which inflates the Palestinians with the empty language of instigation and protest must stop blackmailing the Palestinian cause. There is no honor in instigating a nation under occupation as this only adds insult to injury. In particular, Russia can exercise influence with the main radical figures in Damascus. Accordingly, it has a moral duty to calm them down, especially that Moscow seems to be applying the dual diplomacy of negotiation and resistance. 

* Moderate Arabs should not be absolved of accountability either. They have failed, at least for now, to win supporters, since they lack a comprehensive integrated strategy. Often chasing illusions, leading Arab moderates are often too hesitant to name things as they are. If the Arab moderation axis has truly chosen to support the Palestinian choice to negotiate, then the time has come for it to address all the concerned parties in Arabic, Persian, English, Russian, Hebrew and French to boldly name things as they are and as follows: 

The Palestinian Authority led by President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is the sole party that defends Palestinian rights. As for Hamas, which has turned against the Palestinian Authority, it has ended up buying and selling the Palestinians so long as it puts itself, its ideology, power, and loyalty to Damascus and Tehran above any other national Palestinian considerations. 

Israel is determined to exploit Arab and Islamic radicalism - stretching from Damascus and Tehran through Hamas and other Palestinian organizations - to weaken its negotiating partner, the Palestinian Authority, on two tracks. The first is Hamas and Gaza - by highlighting the failure of the Palestinian Authority to control Gaza and making Hamas aware that the Palestinian Authority is unable to exert political control on the Palestinian arena front. The second is the Syrian track where Israel courts Damascus, not because the Golan Heights are a priority for either side, but simply because the mere talk about a potential revival of negotiations with Syria will divert attention away from the Palestinian track. Had Israel been seriously intent on delivering peace, it would have directly dealt with the two main sources responsible for weakening its negotiating partner and for strengthening Hamas and other missile-launching organizations, namely Damascus and Tehran. 

Yet in reality, and in any case, the Palestinians should carefully consider the following question: What have the Palestinians of Gaza come to gain from the aid they receive from Tehran and Damascus and from the support that Hamas enjoys with its split with the Palestinian Authority and the democratic process that brought it to power in the first place? Those missiles are not a new form of serious resistance to the Israeli occupation. They are just means to provoke the savage Israeli retaliation in defiance of international humanitarian law. The Palestinian right to resistance is fundamental under occupation, and no one has the right to ask the Palestinians to give up their resistance. However, the choice of resistance is not confined to military action especially that history is laden with numerous examples, where civilian resistance has proved more effective than military action. 

Once again, and in any case, what did Syria offer the Palestinians in Gaza other than a “conference” on resistance held in Damascus with the aim of weakening the Palestinians negotiating with Israel? Since when has Iran put Palestinian interests ahead of its own with anything more than slogans and words? So far, the historic truce between Iran and Israel, between the Persians and the Jews, has not been radically influenced by the Palestinian cause. Israel has even played the godfather in the Iran-Contra deals…

In addition, since the Hamas coup d’état that received Syrian and Iranian applause, what have Tehran and Damascus offered to the Gaza Strip under “Hamas” control in order to improve the Palestinian situation? No evidence whatsoever can prove that Iranian and Syrian funds poured in to support institutions in Gaza. On the contrary, there is evidence of short-selling the people of Gaza to serve Iranian and Syrian interests. 

On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority represented by the Abbas-Fayyad government, continues to effectively and practically resist the Israeli occupation. It has embarked on building the Palestinian state brick by brick, against Israel’s will, and with international participation and supervision. It is through this process that international attention can be brought to Israeli breaches of international laws and to Israel’s attempts to elude the obligations of peace. It is through this methodology adopted by the Abbas-Fayyad government that Israel’s intentions to implement a policy of “racial cleansing” can be exposed. Israel can also be confronted by putting the Palestinian house in order, a goal that can be attained by laying the foundations of the state. This government has opted for negotiations with Arab support and on the basis of the Arab peace initiative. Neither Iran nor Syria has the right to weaken the Palestinian negotiating cards with Israel or to undermine the foundations of the Palestinian state. With their subversive attitudes and by using the “resistance” as an excuse to support the opponents of the Palestinian Authority, both Iran and Syria are doing nothing but the biggest of all favors for Israel. 

Israel will remain a loser, even when it thinks that it is emerging as a winner. It is constantly escaping by running forward with a besiege mentality that will eventually lead to its disintegration if it does not change course. Information has it that Israel intends to return to Gaza militarily under the pretext of wiping out the Hamas leadership. Ultimately, neither Syria nor Iran will be a direct party in the Gaza war to save “Hamas” or to spare the Palestinians the next massacre. Israel will commit atrocious massacres in Gaza in the name of purging Hamas and others, but the blatant reality is that Ehud Barak is driven by his racist hatred for the Palestinians and for what he believes was the responsibility of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat in his failure and the failure of his proposals. As a matter of fact, Israel too is politically bankrupt and has proven its own failure.

In its war that Hezbollah manipulated it into, Israel was reduced into a minor militia-fighting power that applies excessive force to the extent of systematically razing the infrastructure of an entire nation in its hunt for militants. It is also in a state of continuous attack on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the West Bank, as it desperately runs from peace and its obligations. In this era of collective punishment looming in Gaza and the West Bank, there is one and an only right choice, the choice to allow the Palestinian Authority to be solely in charge of the Palestinian people. It is time for Hamas and the other organizations made in Damascus and Tehran to stop manipulating and dancing to serve Israel at the Palestinian expense. It is the dance of Arab, Israeli, and Iranian radicalism which incidentally serves a temporary interest common to all these radical forces. 

This dance holds Lebanon hostage until the regional games are in order. It is time to name things as they are, and this has become an Arab responsibility. When Arabs meet to listen for the outcomes of the efforts and mediations conducted by the Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa, they must muster all their courage to name those obstructing the election of a president in Lebanon. They have to be courageous enough to disclose Syria’s responsibility for this obstruction and for the presidential void it has created with Iranian coordination. Amr Moussa’s responsibility is to avoid letting diplomacy or any other considerations take over his conscience. Otherwise, he will have participated in murdering Lebanon and in the ensuing political assassinations.