Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bu.edu!telecom-request From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Calling Lebanon: Why Not Direct? Message-ID: Date: 5 Mar 91 00:13:40 GMT Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 22 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 181, Message 9 of 9 A recent submission to the Digest asked: > Does anyone know why one has to first call an AT&T operator, to call a > number in Lebanon? Do telephone companies doubt the ability of people > calling there to dial a number? And also, why are there so little > lines to this country? I know that in France, for example, it is much > easier to get through to Lebanon , and you can dial by yourself. Quite a few of the non-dialable (from the USA) international points are in Africa. There may be a little history here, but I am not sure of all the angles. If you go back a *long* time ago, many African countries were colonies of France and England. In the case of France at least, they seemed to control the possible phone connections / routings very closely. I recall well that through the 1950 - 60's era when all international calls went through the operator, calls to many or most places in Africa went from White Plains to Paris, *then* south. White Plains had to 'book' their calls through the Paris overseas operators who only accepted calls from the USA to Africa at certain times of the day. Calls to African colonies of European countries were always difficult and tedious. Calls were permitted to (what was then called) the Belgian Congo three days a week only! PAT]