“The Mehlis report is a political game”

The credibility of the Mehlis report has been compromised just a few hours after the distribution of some of its copies to the press. It has been shown that there are two copies of the said report. One was sent to the UN Secretary General, and the other one had been rectified and sent to the press.
This means the report that is to decide the region’s fate is subject to political considerations. In other words, the German judge is accountable to the authority of Kofi Annan. Mehlis, who was appointed by the UN to investigate Hariri’s death, should only make reference to his professional spirit. But the investigation would enable the commission in charge of it to make some political arrangements, by appointing, without any objectivity, the most convenient people.
The credibility of such a commission and perhaps even its respect have been already tarnished when it granted the Lebanese press access to the report’s outcome, even before it was released. In other words, it did not take security measures to guarantee the professional secret.
From the beginning, the investigation assumed a political dimension. It even seemed the preparatory stage of a sentence letter on Damascus to immediately jump into the second phase, which will be imposing a political and economic embargo on Syria, which would eventually lead to the fall of Assad’s regime.
There is a big difference between an international investigation based on law and transparency, and a political investigation whose objectives have already been mentioned. Within this framework, Mehlis still raises questions and accusations from several sources, especially the Palestinian. The investigation has been based on information and statements from the worst enemies of the Syrian government, which is not fair.
Probably this report has certain confirmed information, maybe even serious mistakes made by the Lebanese and Syrian security services, but they are not enough to accuse them. Furthermore, the statement given by the UN Secretary in which he suppresses names like Maher Assad from the list, may lead to several interpretations. The first one would be to enable the United States and western countries to put more pressure on Bachar to marginalize him peacefully, or to give Egypt more time to convince El Assad to unconditionally adopt the U.S. agenda. Or finally, to allow the UN envoy, Larson, to present his new suggestions in order to implement Resolution 1559.
It is a dangerous game that may cause terrible consequences.