February 11, 2010 - The Guardian - Why we must remember HaririFive years on from the murder of Lebanon's prime minister, political changes have obscur

Faisal al Yafai guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 February 2010 10.00 GMT Article historyWho cares who killed Rafiq Hariri? This weekend, tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Lebanese will answer that question by descending on to the streets of Beirut to mark the fifth anniversary of the death of their former prime minister.

The man who rebuilt much of the city and served as the country's leader twice was blown to pieces in a massive car explosion on Valentine's Day 2005 and his killers have yet to be found. His supporters have taken out billboards across the city, reminding people to come out and support them on 14 February. Some carry images of other politicians and journalists who were assassinated in the months after Hariri.

But, really, who cares? Much has happened in the five years since Hariri's death, so much that his murder has almost been obscured. The Syrians finally ended their military presence in their tiny neighbour, ushering in a new era in Lebanese politics, one that has been dominated by a struggle between pro-Syria Lebanese (led by Hezbollah) and pro-western factions.

For now, Hezbollah is in the ascendancy, especially after it fought Israel to a standstill in 2006. Its claim to represent the Shia population is virtually unchallenged. And its writ runs further than security: in some parts of Beirut's southern suburbs, Hezbollah controls one side of the street and the police the other. Residents have to cross the road to buy alcohol.

It is a complex jigsaw, and the fate of Lebanon is to be the chessboard on which bigger battles are fought. The difficulty for the Lebanese searching for the truth is that the alliances among the other players are shifting: the UN tribunal set up three years ago to find Hariri's killers began in a heavily politicised atmosphere, with the blame almost instantly being pushed on Syria. The United States applied heavy pressure on Damascus. But in the years since the parameters have shifted. As is well known, the aftermath of Iraq and the continuing concerns about Iran's nuclear intentions have put Damascus on the route of Obama's jaw-jaw diplomacy.

Thus the Lebanese are beginning to lose faith, suspecting that their concerns will be sidelined by regional politics. The tribunal is still functioning – its head was in Lebanon for meetings all of last week – but the atmosphere has changed decidedly.

Last year, the tribunal finally opened in The Hague, following four years of investigations. Within a month, it had released four high-ranking Lebanese generals who had been held without charge in solitary confinement since 2005. The generals were all heads of Lebanese security and intelligence departments at the time of Hariri's death, a time when Syria still dominated much of the machinery of security. That puzzled and concerned the Lebanese because it was unclear at the time – it is still unclear today – whether their release was due to the tribunal uncovering fresh evidence that took the investigation towards different suspects, or the beginning of a drop in the pressure on Damascus.

Then in October King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia made a visit to Damascus, rebuilding ties between the two countries. Abdullah and Hariri were close, and in the years since the two countries fell out bitterly. The final suggestion that, if Syria was involved and if the tribunal ever charges Syrian actors they are likely to be low-level functionaries, came in December when Rafiq Hariri's son and heir and current Lebanese prime minister) Saad Hariri made the journey to Damascus and met Syria's president Bashar al-Assad. Saad Hariri did not go on a state visit but to pay his condolences for the death of Assad's brother, Majd. But the symbolism was clear.

Even Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader who has said some angry things about Syria (and whose father was also killed in mysterious circumstances) has made his peace and is expected to go to Damascus soon. So the signs do not look good for a tribunal whose outcome will be divisive in Lebanon.

Yet while the normalisation of Lebanon's relationship with Syria is a good thing – even the Daily Star ran an editorial this week suggesting Syria could be part of Lebanon's internal reconciliation – it should not detract from finding the truth about Hariri's killing, and not for mere justice alone.

Hariri was more than just a politician or businessman – he was a symbol of an independent Lebanon, a fractious, often bitterly divided country squeezed between bigger neighbours. Hariri did not unite the nation and was intensely disliked by some, but his death is now part of the history of an independent Lebanon, and without understanding that history, the country will always be looking backwards rather than forwards.