The Lebanese daily al-Akhbar on Wednesday ran a shocking story quoting a top aide to former US Vice President Dick Cheney on the satisfaction of the Bush administration with the turbulent situation in Lebanon and the administration’s dissatisfaction with the Cedar Revolution.

John Hannah, who retired after serving as first deputy VP under Cheney, on Thursday told NOW Lebanon the story was a complete fabrication and denied having made any such statements and described the report as “one example of the truly desperate and ridiculous lengths” of “Lebanon’s enemies” in the run-up to the June 7 parliamentary elections.

The daily wrote that Hannah was of Lebanese descent and spoke to al-Akhbar during his recent visit to Jordan and revealed “the elements of the previous [US] administration's policies towards the secrets of Lebanon after the end of the [US] mandate.”

The daily said Hannah reported Cheney and President George W. Bush had “ignored the Lebanese issue, which was classified in the field of secondary files with the administration” and that Bush had “expressed satisfaction with the reality of the Syrian tutelage over Lebanon until the events of September 11, 2001.”

“The political reality is that the state of Lebanon, during the term of President George Bush the father, was satisfactory in the era of bringing the Middle East out of the cold war into Arab-Israeli negotiations in Madrid in 1991. We wanted Syria to be comfortable in the more advanced negotiations that followed during the Clinton administration, until the assassination of [Israeli] Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin,” the daily quoted Hannah as saying.

“We believed that the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon was linked to the withdrawal of the Israeli army and to the resolution of Arab-Israeli conflict and part of a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East. The Europeans and the Israelis agreed with us on this equation,” al-Akhbar quoted the aide as staying.

The daily also quoted Hannah as saying the US perceived Hezbollah as part of the Iranian policy in the region and a terrorist organization that played outside the traditional rules of conflict.

After the events of 9/11, the daily reported, former US Ambassador to Lebanon Vincent Battle had expressed to Cheney his displeasure with the personal intervention of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State David Satterfield with late PM Rafik Hariri and Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt. After the start of the war on Iraq, Satterfield had also told the Qornet Shehwan gathering that the US did not foresee positive repercussions of the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon during a meeting at the US Embassy in Awkar, the daily quoted Hannah as saying.

And on the divide between the March 14 and March 8 alliances, Hannah was quoted as saying, “After [former] Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa informed us of his country’s desire to amend its relations with our administration, we received a large number of complaints from March 14. The response Cheney asked us to send shocked Hariri and Jumblatt with the [US] intransigence toward Syria.” The reply also included a promise from Cheney to end any Syrian influence over Lebanon and a request of American allies in Lebanon to pressure Syria’s allies to isolate Hezbollah, according to al-Akhbar.

In an exclusive talk with NOW Lebanon, Hannah states that al-Akhbar’s story was a complete fabrication.

Hannah: I was contacted by a number of friends in Lebanon [Wednesday] morning who alerted me to the al-Akhbar article.  The alleged interview that al-Akhbar claims to have conducted with me is a complete fabrication.  I have never in my life sat for an interview with anyone from al-Akhbar, not in Jordan nor anywhere else.  The article claims that the interview was conducted during a recent private visit by me to Jordan.  No such visit has ever occurred.  The article also claims that I am of Lebanese descent, which I would be happy to acknowledge except for the fact that it is totally untrue.  So what we have here is an interview that never occurred, during a trip that I never took, in which I am alleged to have said things that I have never said.
 
Why would they do something like that, knowing it would reach you?

Hannah: We have a saying that a lie travels half way around the world before the truth has time to take its first step.  These lies were published with the clear intent of harming those forces in Lebanon that are struggling on behalf of the country's independence and sovereignty.  The enemies of Lebanon's independence are working overtime to sow doubt and confusion and fear in the minds of the Lebanese people.  This article is one example of the truly desperate and ridiculous lengths that they will go to in order to achieve their objectives.  It would truly be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.  I have been watching the Middle East for a long time and have seen a lot of remarkable things, but even I am amazed by how brazen these people are to invent an interview out of whole-cloth. 
 
Why you and the former vice president?

Hannah: The vice president was probably the person in the US government who best understood how critical it was to America's own interests after the assassination of Rafik Hariri to support the March 14th movement and others standing up for Lebanon's independence and sovereignty.  From February 14, 2005 to his last day in office, he more than anyone else understood the importance of ending Syria's occupation of Lebanon, achieving full justice for Rafik Hariri against his murderers - wherever they may be found - and ensuring that the enemies of Lebanon's independence and democracy could never return to take control of the country.  But I suppose that even for the forces behind this article, making up an interview with Vice President Cheney would have been a bridge too far.  Making up an interview with me was much less risky and in that sense I became a convenient vehicle for putting words into the Vice President's mouth. 
 
And why now?

Hannah: Because the forces opposing Lebanon's independence and democracy are desperate in advance of the upcoming elections and will do whatever they can to intimidate the majority and create difficulties for it in the minds of the Lebanese people.  Lebanese independence and democracy has many enemies.  I think these forces are also trying to take advantage of the fluid situation in Washington now with a new administration in place, still formulating its policies.  People in the Middle East and in Lebanon are excited but also nervous and uncertain about what to expect.  But for Lebanon, it must be said that the initial signals from the new administration are quite positive with supportive statements from both the President and the Secretary of State, and a total commitment to the international tribunal.  That was very bad news for Lebanon's enemies.

-NOW Staff