So What Does it Mean to “Disassociate” Yourself From a Decision ?

In most news reporting of the Arab League sanctions on Syria, we read something like this on Lebanon’s position:

Iraq abstained from the vote and Lebanon “disassociated” itself from the resolution.

The word “disassociated” is always, always put in quotation marks; everybody seems to be wondering: Why didn’t Lebanon just abstain (no quotation marks), why did they have to invent this vague stance?

If abstaining is the diplomatic equivalent of saying “Leave me out of this”, what does “dissociating” mean? Here’s a clue:

Lebanon has sent mixed messages about whether it would participate in sanctions. Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour said last week Beirut would not take steps against Syria, but Prime Minister Najib Mikati said on Thursday his government would implement Arab League decisions, whatever its misgivings.

So, to avoid further befuddlement and needless quotation marks, I have invented the following Lebanese definition of dissociating one’s self:

A part of me wants to strongly vote yes, but another part wants to strongly vote no. I’m taking a position that doesn’t commit me to any stance, that sounds morally righteous but that is vague enough to imply to all sides involved that I really wanted to take their position were it not for the pesky other side.

That wasn’t so hard, was it?

Update: Apparently the term was the subject of wonder and ridicule in the Arab League, and by Lebanese commentators. (Thanks Wael)