A President 'Made in Lebanon and Abroad'
02 December 2016
By Eyad Abu Shakra
A few days ago, a supposedly 'wise' Lebanese politician hailed the imminent
end of the presidential impasse by saying ''we are going to have 'a made in
Lebanon president'''!
Such words are misleading as they are painful. The said politician who is well
experienced in Lebanese politics, militarily and politically, with foes and
friends, must realise that Lebanon has never in its history managed to elect a
president without either a foreign deal or as a result of dramatic regional or
international imbalance. In fact, had the Lebanese had any real say in
choosing a president, the post wouldn't have remained vacant for around a year
and half, there would not have been the 'Doha Agreement' (that allowed the
election of ex-president Michel Sleiman and ended the occupation by Hezbollah
and co of downtown Beirut), the 'Taif Accords' (which ended the 1975-1990
Lebanese War), the Richard Murphy attempt in 1988, and the Robert Murphy deal
in 1958.
Alas, the fact is that Lebanon has been an 'unfinished nation-building
project' despite 96 years of its existence in its current borders and 73 years
of becoming an independent state. The reason behind this is that the
philosophy that underpinned the 'independence format' viewed and treated the
Lebanese as members of 'sectarian flocks' not as citizens. As time passed, and
in the absence of proper citizenship and lasting religious and sectarian
loyalties, the 'flock mentality' became more entrenched, and eventually,
'institutionalized'. Then, even when vibrant forces within all 'flocks' now
acting as 'refuges' too attempted to rebel against this status quo, many
internal and external elements came together to crush all attempts.
Thus, today, when some hail the agreement on 'A made in Lebanon president',
they intentionally ignore important and unsavoury facts, just as those who
have been parroting the silly words ''any president is better than the
continuing vacuum'' for the last two and a half years. In reality there has
been 'no vacuum' and talking about, or rather using it as an excuse, are
overlooking the following truths.
The first is that Lebanon is a country actually occupied and dominated by
Hezbollah; a religious-military party with vital links outside the country
(i.e. Iran), and enjoys a stature and capabilities that far exceed those of
the Lebanese state, which in turn is penetrated by the party thanks to
sectarian apportionment of political, military, and economic posts.
Incidentally, Hezbollah, which is an inseparable part of Iran's regional
set-up, and follows its orders and political directives throughout the Middle
East, has been the actor that has prevented the election of a president for
the last two and a half years, blackmailing the Lebanese people into accepting
its candidate, now described as 'a made in Lebanon president'!
The second is that Lebanon, even before becoming a 'polity' in 1920, and later
as an independent republic in 1943, was a 'principality' that covered Mount
Lebanon and was always susceptible to regional competition and jockeying for
influence between regional governors and sub-governors of neighbouring Syria,
Palestine, and even Egypt. Later, since the creation of Israel in 1948,
Lebanon became a battleground of the Arab-Israeli conflict and its
repercussions, which added to its fragile fabric and weak political consensus.
Today, as the maps of the Levant are being revised, Israel does not seem
bothered by a Hezbollah's de facto 'occupation' of Lebanon, or worried about
the alleged presidential 'vacuum'; and even more importantly it does not feel
uneasy at all with Hezbollah's active participation with other sectarian
militias in Iran's occupation of several parts of Syria.
Thirdly, as far as Iran is concerned, the whole Middle East is currently going
through a decisive and historical period of nationalist confrontation with a
sectarian faηade. Iran is, indeed, fighting a comprehensive 'war of revenge'
against Arab Sunni Islam. So far, this war has displaced between 15 and 20
million Arab Sunnis in Iraq and Syria, and has destroyed their cities and
towns from Al-Falluja and Al-Ramadi to Dera'a, through Mosul, Deir Az-Zor, Al-Raqqah,
Aleppo, Hamah, Homs and Damascus suburbs.
Fourthly, in connection with the above, President Barack Obama during his last
few weeks in the White House, seems to be in a hurry to complete the mission
he considers the 'cornerstone' of his Middle East policy, as reflected in the
JCPOA with Tehran, rehabilitating and normalizing political relations with
Iran, if not making it a strategic ally of the USA, and giving it a free hand
in its neighbouring Arab countries. Thus, it is no coincidence that the need
to end the 'vacuum' in Lebanon was timed with the battle to liberate Mosul,
which the UN expects is going to leave more than a million homeless (mostly
Sunni Arabs), and the silence accompanying the annihilation of Aleppo at the
hands of a shaky regime saved from collapse by Iran's militias, then by direct
Russian intervention.
Without disregarding Yemen too, today we are in a 'regional situation'
exacerbated by an American vision that has impacted several sensitive issues,
namely in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe.
In Europe, Washington's withdrawal has sent a clear message to Moscow to do as
it pleases in its own historical sphere of influence beginning with the
Ukraine. It has also allowed a humanitarian crisis like the refugee waves
heading for Europe to become a strong political card played effectively by
anti-Europe British, and racist and ultra-conservative anti-refugees mainly,
Muslims in France, the Netherlands, Germany and other nations. Such a
situation, has in the opposite direction, prepared the ground for an angry and
extremist, sometimes terrorist, reaction within the underclass of marginalised
second and third generations in slums and 'ghettoes' inhabited by Muslim
immigrants.
However, it is in the Middle East and North Africa that Obama's catastrophic
policies have been most obvious, in every respect, since his now famous 'Cairo
Speech' just before the 'Arab Spring' early in his first term in office. What
sounded like 'innocent' utopia towards Palestine, democratic change, and
fighting terrorism in Obama's discourse, clearly appeared during his second
term as destructive unethical negativity, the consequences of which are for
all to see: Iraq is been torn apart, Syria is in ruins, Turkey and the Arab
Gulf are states under threat, the Palestinian settlement is all but
non-existent, Sunni-Shi'i tensions becoming a raging sectarian war, and long
dormant Arab Iranian and Turko Kurdish tensions threatening to engulf the
whole region with blood and fire.
Given such a background, how can the Lebanese, who have failed to build a
homeland, believe that they can produce 'A made in Lebanon president'?!
Eyad Abu Shakra is the managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat. He has been with
the newspaper since 1978.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments