Lebanon and Iraq have booted out their PMs almost simultaneously. Could it really be coincidental despite the serious economic and political problems in both countries? United States and Israel have lost in Syria. It's time to continue the mission in other theaters, hoping for success. After all, Syria isn't the end of the world. There's so much to manipulate in the neighbor's yard.
Iraq's PM Mahdi chose to stay neutral in the regional conflict between US/Israel/KSA and Iran. Many fat-cats in the international arena didn't like that. Most Lebanese banks back HezbAllah and meddlers watching from the sidelines have been displeased. Banks in Lebanon were already crumbling under crippling U.S. sanctions. External forces are much too hyped. They must see blood, rubble and debris in independent Muslim states, not prosperity. Washington could no longer contain its fury against sovereign Iran despite choking her with economic sanctions for 40 years. Too afraid for direct military intervention against the Islamic Republic which is free from sectarian strife, it recently clamped additional sanctions on the country's construction sector largely handled by the IRGC.
The U.S. Deep State is aware that both Iraq and Lebanon have sectarian issues, a scourge that helps to play favorably into the hands of foreign agitators. When conflict stirs, every ethnic/sectarian group prefers to fight rather than give up on their privileges for making peace. Unrest worsens, border security weakens and you never know who can be purchased for a paltry price. The scenario couldn't be more attractive for U.S. and Saudi proxies to gate crash and 'make hay while the sun shines.' If protests get violent, the rabble-rousers in the pavilions outside are elated. It provides greater opportunity for manipulation. So, when the Amal Movement in Lebanon tried to persuade the crowds for calm, the international media dubbed that as 'violence by Hezbollah.' Iran has been targeted with plenty of baseless propaganda for the killing of Iraqi protesters by unknown masked men, including Iraqi police. The mayhem in Karbala was particularly unsettling. Protests in Iraq have been more hurtful with nearly 240 protesters killed in October. Not to mention, instigating uprisings and civil wars ruins the infrastructure, if persistent, another terrible blow to the economy. Both Lebanon and Iraq have enough experience of this from history. Nonetheless, U.S. and its allies are walking on glass. They need to be darn careful so their meddling doesn't inadvertently benefit the groups they are desperate to eliminate.
Re-elections after protests may only drag the situation back to square one. Caretaker governments are much too helpless. Parliaments in both countries have the quota system for different ethnic groups, a rule that cannot be abolished nor should it be. Protests and reelections won't bar corrupt politicians from returning .. .. unless loyal and incorruptible leaders get the recognition they deserve from a community with a minimal of polarization, as in Tunisia recently, a glorious example how a nation can truly benefit from a CHANGE. Unfortunately the social environment as well as the political mindset are a whole lot different in Lebanon and Iraq. For a meaningful change, Lebanese and the Iraqis need to do a lot more than demand resignations. The focus got to be on reforms, changing the system. They must insist on reforms, watch like a hawk and be ready to get back on the streets to thwart broken promises, if any.