More on Lebanon

In a previous post I had noted that a victory in the southern region by a pro-Syrian candidate was not necessarily proof that pro-Syrian's would win out generally. But now recent developments indicate that this was not a one-time thing. From the WaPo:

A former army general who returned to Lebanon last month after 15 years in exile appeared headed for a sweeping victory in the third round of legislative elections Sunday as anti-Syrian candidates braced for significant losses.

Again, I think all those on the right that were certain the ouster of Syrian forces and a demand for election meant that Lebanon would be U.S. light jumped the gun. This is par for the course. They've said the same thing about Egypt, but from all accounts, the elections there are more for show. More significantly, they said the the elections in Iraq would calm everything down, but that hasn't happened either.
I think this article speaks to the problem outlined here nicely. Of note:

Elections are proceeding in many places across the Arab world, just as President Bush and his advisers had hoped. But there's a hitch: Sometimes militant Islamists are winning.

I also found this statement really strange.

Bush's representatives occasionally have suggested that the president believes the ballot box can redeem even terrorist groups.

I think there's some truth to the notion that a once unelected political group or whatever might change their mode of operation after they have been elected, but I think that has more to do with the fact that they no longer need to, say, blow stuff up and kill people to get their way often times. Bush, however, seems to think that there is some magical process that happens when something like a democratic process takes place. I think this is pretty damn silly.
What I think is perhaps most interesting about all of this is that it seems to legitimize these terrorist organizations. Think of the message that is sent--"you can blow up all kinds of stuff, and if you keep it up someday people will be calling you Senator". Surely this was not the result that the Bush adminstration was shooting for. See:

Hezbollah, a Shiite militia allied with Iran that has been responsible for some of the deadliest attacks on U.S. interests in the Middle East, also poses a challenge for Bush. Its strong showing in elections Sunday, the second of four rounds, gives it an opportunity to participate in Lebanon's government for the first time. That is not the outcome the United States hoped for when it and France pressured Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon and end its political meddling.
Bush could face a choice over providing aid to the new Lebanese government or demanding that it first disarm Hezbollah. But Hezbollah, buoyed by the election results, seems less willing than ever to disarm.