It seems like a successful Middle Eastern policy has always eluded us. Whether American aims have been well-meaning or self-serving, getting things right in that part of the world has always been outside of our grasp. We have never really understood the region, and the efforts we make to build bridges into Middle Eastern society usually fall flat on their faces.

Our seemingly chronic failure could all stem from Arab suspicion of all Western powers in the wake of centuries of imperialism, or from American support of Israel. Perhaps it's the fundamentalism of Wahabi Islam that shuns any kind of Western influence, or maybe the fact that all we do is clumsily meddle in their affairs.

This kind of misunderstanding is present in American policy towards Lebanon, a country that has been under heavy-handed Syrian hegemony for the last 25 years. After the 1983 attack on a Marine barracks -an attack that killed 241 Americans -- began a cycle of violence against our diplomats and missionaries there, our country essentially gave up on Lebanon.

America has a national tendency to label nations as either good guys or bad guys, to carve the world into teams, if you will. The team in white hats would include us and Great Britain, along with most other NATO nations. Our opponents, who certainly wear black hats, have been called "the axis of evil," and probably include other countries like Libya and France.

Obviously any student of history or international politics can figure out that most nations cannot be divided into teams like this. The Middle East similarly eludes our understanding and these kinds of divisions.

Our allies in Saudi Arabia have never held democratic elections, are ruled by an incredibly rich monarchy and have a human rights record that rivals the Taliban. But they let us station troops and aircraft in their country, so we give them white hats.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein was little different, and we armed them extensively in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. Iraq was going to be one of the nations we counted on to secure stability in the region, but in 1991 we invaded. Saddam and the Iraqis wore black hats for a decade.

Sometimes it gets hard to tell who our allies are, and why we support them instead of other countries.

The politics of the region are deeply tied to history, Islam and oil. Most of the time it is impossible to honestly and realistically separate the good from the bad. America's economy runs on the oil produced in the Middle East, but we have very little clarity on what is going on there.

Things are becoming clear in the tumultuous and violent country of Lebanon.

For decades that country has been under the de facto control of black-hatted Syria. Lebanese rulers have been almost completely subservient to their dominant Arab neighbor, but over time there has been an increasingly vocal and unified movement for true independence that has been waiting for something to mobilize the country.

Rafiq Hariri, Lebanon's reform-minded prime minister was gunned down in the streets by Syrian hit men. Rather than going about their day-to-day business as expected, the Lebanese were outraged. This brazen and blatant act of murder was exactly the catalyst that Lebanese dissidents needed to unite the country.

What has become known as the "cedar revolution" is completely unheard of in Middle Eastern history. It is a peaceful and nonviolent revolt, advocating democratic elections. It is the first time in history that Arabs are agitating for democracy without any outside influence.

Lebanese are using nonviolence and civil disobedience to change the world they live in, and our government and our media are completely ignoring this awesome situation.

Finally we can divide at least part of this enigmatic region into teams. On one side stand Syria and a ruthless occupation, on the other is peaceful revolution.

For once there is an easy choice we can make, and good guys to support. Now all we have to do is make it happen instead of ignoring this unprecedented opportunity.