By Andrew Wander
Daily Star staff
BEIRUT: Almost half of Lebanese believe that US President Barack Obama will have a positive impact on the Middle East and have a favorable opinion of him, a poll has found. The IPSOS poll asked residents of six Arab countries what they thought of the new president, who completed his first 100 days in office earlier this month. In Lebanon, pollsters found that just 16 percent of those asked held a negative opinion of Obama, while 41 percent held an unfavorable view of the United States.

The poll's findings signify that Obama's conciliatory approach to diplomacy in Middle East may be paying dividends as he seeks to restore America's image in a region that suffered disproportionately at the sharp end of the policies of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

When asked their opinion of Obama, 43 percent of Lebanese respondents said they had a favorable view of him - 11 percent more than had a favorable opinion of the United States.

The poll shows that the president has maintained a high level of personal popularity since taking office in January, even in countries where the US is not looked kindly upon. In every country polled, Obama enjoyed a higher level of approval than the United States as a whole.

TEL AVIV, Israel (CNN) --

Pope Benedict XVI urged the Israelis and Palestinians to find a "just resolution" to their long-running conflict as he arrived in Israel Monday.

"I plead with all those responsible to explore every possible avenue," the pope said, "So that both peoples may live in peace in a homeland of their own, within secure and internationally recognized borders." He cited the biblical prophet Isaiah on the meaning of "security" -- a justification Israel often uses for its actions against Palestinians.

"Security -- batah [in Hebrew] -- arises from trust and refers not just to the absence of threat but also to the sentiment of calmness and confidence," he said in a speech at Israeli President Shimon Peres' residence.

Later, speaking to religious leaders at Notre Dame Center in Jerusalem, the pope called for interfaith understanding and cooperation.

"Since many are quick to point out the readily apparent differences between religions, as believers or religious persons we are presented with the challenge to proclaim with clarity what we share in common," the pope said.

By Gamal A. G. Soltan
The current tension between Egypt and Hizbullah is a crisis that has been waiting to happen for years. The causes of tension between the two sides are multifaceted. This is a conflict between nationalism and supra-nationalism, between Egypt and Iran, between moderation and radicalism, between Sunnis and Shiites and between status quo and revisionist forces in the Middle East. Hizbullah's ideology, its nature as a non-state armed actor and its strong alliance with Iran are sufficient to generate heavy doubts and concerns among mainstream Arab states regarding the movement.

Until the year 2000, Hizbullah's dedication to the mission of ending Israeli occupation in southern Lebanon helped offset these concerns. But since the unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in May of that year, apprehension has been rising regarding the possibility that Hizbullah is redirecting its capabilities toward further destabilization of the region.

Hizbullah interference in other countries' internal affairs was bound to happen. Hizbullah successfully established itself as a Lebanese national resistance movement during the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. As such, it was able to conceal the other dimensions integral to its identity. The ideology of Hizbullah commits the party to the goals and strategies of the revolutionary Islamic movement: transforming the nature of Middle East political systems and societies and the liberation of all of Palestine.

Ironically, the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 was at the same time Hizbullah's greatest achievement and the development that denied the party the capacity to further conceal its supra-national identity. The partial stabilization of the situation in southern Lebanon in the aftermath of the 2006 conflict made a new Hizbullah adventure across the Lebanese-Israeli border unlikely. Hizbullah had to find other venues for demonstrating its hard-line anti-Israel stand. It was Gaza that gave the party a new opportunity to maintain its anti-Israel credentials.

By Anthony Elghossain
Special to The Daily Star
WASHINGTON: One year after the Lebanese clashed with each other in an eruption of violence that cost the lives of some 200 individuals, the country tensely awaits parliamentary elections on June 7. One month from now, the Lebanese will take to the streets again. This time, however, the battle is for ballots. Unfolding in a playground open to the ambitions of regional and international powers alike, the Lebanese election is likely to impact American policy with respect to Syria and Iran.

To make clear the consequences of a Hizbullah victory, some State Department officials have stated that American aid to Lebanon hinges on the election results, although there are some murmurs that Lebanon will not be isolated like Gaza, regardless of the electoral outcome in June.

The struggle in Lebanon has been framed as part of a regional stand-off pitting the United States, Sunni Arab regimes, and Israel against Syria, Iran, and various non-state actors (including Hizbullah). Much is true in this view the region, but the Lebanon's fate now lies elsewhere. For all the emphasis on democrats and despots, moderates and extremists, and Sunnis and Shiites, rival Lebanese Christian factions now hold the political cards in the Levant. Christians and Muslims receive equal representation in Lebanon's Parliament, making Christians politically significant even after relative political decline. In Lebanon, internal unity is a prerequisite for effective communal politics: Shiites have coalesced around Hizbullah and Sunnis have united behind the Hariri family, but the Christians remain divided. An ideological rift over Lebanon's orientation toward the West and the Middle East has combined with a barebones struggle for internal supremacy to severely hinder Christian cohesion in Lebanon.