Up to 150,000 opposition activists rallied in Martyr’s Square chanting, “Syria Out!” and waving Lebanese flags:

Monday’s demonstration marked three weeks since the Feb. 14 assassination of former premier Rafik Hariri that began a peaceful campaign against Syrian control.

The massive crowd, chanting “Freedom, sovereignty, independence!” began marching through the streets to the site of the bomb blast that killed Hariri.

Some in the crowd carried large photographs of Hariri. One group carried a banner that read, “Today we have one target: To liberate our land.”

Others brandished photographs of the public prosecutor and six intelligence chiefs whose dismissal they are demanding over the blast.

“Truth, freedom, national unity,” chanted the crowd.

The demonstration came as Bashir al-Assad and Lebanese President Emile Lahooud announced that Syrian forces will pullback to the Bakaa Valley, although they said that a full withdrawal will have to wait for further negotiations:

The announcement, made after a meeting between Syrian President Bashar Assad and Lebanese President Emile Lahoud, said Syrian troops will pull back from northern and central Lebanon to the east, near Syria’s border.

Then, military officials from both countries will decide within a month how many Syrian troops will remain in the Bekaa Valley and how long they will stay there.

After a negotiated timeframe, the two governments will “agree to complete the withdrawal of the remaining forces,” the statement said.

The agreement did not set a specific timetable for that complete withdrawal, which could fall short of international demands that Syria completely pull its troops from its eastern neighbour.

The agreement stated that , “The Syrian and Lebanese agree on continuing the withdrawal of Syrian Arab forces.” However, State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said that he agreement was not enough:

“Until Syrian forces and intelligence agents are out of Lebanon, (UN Security Council Resolution) 1559 is not respected,” Ereli said.

The September UN resolution, drafted by the United States and France, called on Syria to withdraw forces from Lebanon, stop influencing politics in the country and allow Lebanon to hold presidential elections as scheduled.

Ereli’s statement was but the latest in what has become a daily full-court press by the White House:

The United States will keep up unilateral and international pressure on Syria to completely withdraw troops from Lebanon, White House director of communications Dan Bartlett told U.S. television, describing President Assad’s plan to withdraw his army in two stages as “half-hearted.”
“Unfortunately, if you listen to the Lebanese people and other people who have seen his behavior in the past, it seems to be more generalities and half-measures as opposed to living up to the international community’s demand,” Bartlett told CNN.

Ä…Å

“If we’re going to have a free and fair election this spring, it’s hard to believe that that could take place with the presence of Syrian troops and secret services officials,” Bartlett said.

“The international community is united with the Lebanese people in asking and telling the Syrian government to withdraw its troops and, more importantly, or just as importantly, withdrawing its security secret services as well from Lebanon,” Bartlett told Fox News.

“This is critically important for the future of the Lebanese people. We’re going to continue to keep the pressure by speaking with a clear, united voice with the international community.”

Bartlett emphasized how President Bush and President Chirac had already joined together to criticize Syria. He said statements from Russia and Saudi Arabia calling for a withdrawal were also “important voices.”

“So the pressure is on Syria to live up to the international community’s demands and fulfill the desires of the Lebanese people,” he said.

Trucks loaded with furniture (shades of the 2001 White House transition?) were seen heading toward the Bekaa Valley. This was seen as a sign that the troop movement was imminent.

UPDATE:

Tony from Across the Bay, in a post dissecting the latest convoluted argument from Juan Cole gives this insightful and fascinating analysis of Hizballah’s position:

…there were supporters of Hizbullah who were actually marching independently with the protesters in downtown Beirut, as a report in As-Safir, which interviewed them, made clear. Moreoever, letters to newspapers, like An-Nahar, from Shiites, were calling on Hassan Nasrallah, as did Randa al-Khalil, to “place our Shiism under the Lebanese banner.”

Finally, Cole did not read Nasrallah’s careful statement well. Nasrallah is not calling for a pro-Syrian rally. He’s calling for a march to reject foreign intervention. He’s also said that he found the withdrawal, if part of the Taef, which he said should remain the basis of the Lebanese system, is a positive thing. Of course it was muzzled, but that’s because Hizbullah is in an awkward situation. If they come out too strongly on Syria’s side, they will alienate the Lebanese and appear as Syrian goons (so it was significant that he issued his statement in front of a Lebanese flag, not the yellow Hizballah flag, as customary.) On the other hand, going against Syria, whom they also need, will weaken their position vis ?? vis their rhetoric (and their ability to maintain their current privileges, that’s why the entire statement was concerned with their retaining their arms and prestige) and turn them into nothing more than another Shiite party in Lebanon, and not, as Nick Blanford put it to me, “the Shiite Nasser” (referring to Nasrallah himself). Which is another thing. Cole not only says that Hizbullah equals 40% of Lebanon and all the Shi’a, he also thinks that Hizbullah doesn’t have internal debates (that’s the fingerprint of a poseur)! Hizbullah wants to have its cake and eat it too. So they will go on the streets, effectively giving the Syrians a break, but without saying so, thus leaving their hand extended to the Lebanese. The Lebanese have reacted calmly to this. Someone from Hariri’s bloc said that this was a democracy and in a democracy anyone can march for whatever they like. I.e., they didn’t take it as an affront. It’s all part of the political maneuvering. Hizbullah’s march is about their weapons and the clause in 1559, and everyone realizes that. Hizbullah will not be part of the Syrian instigators who have been going around shooting at people.