Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Instability will Continue

Minor clashes occur almost daily throughout Lebanon and receive little coverage in the media.

The latest clashes between Lebanese Security Forces and youths in Ouzai, the attack on the army barracks in Verdun, and the vandalism at the Charles Helou army barracks show the willingness of anti-government forces to use violence against the government in efforts to overthrow it.

Prior to the 12 July war, the Army was a respected institution trusted by citizens. When the army acted - even when they killed civilians, as occured during the benzene riots of 2004 - it had the full support of Lebanese citizens. The derek (gendarme), before they were reformed in 2006, were often ridiculed as weak and incompetent. The derek dealt casually with any conflict they were sent to regulate. When the government sent the Army, you knew they were serious.

The Army was the only institution/symbol of Lebanese unity respected by all sects.

Now, the Army is a target. Why? For the answer to that, we must look to what changed during the last few months: the Army's mandate to deploy in the south and disarm Hezbollah.

Verbally denouncing the Army is still taboo, but it seems there are other coercive ways being employed to attack the only universally respected government institution.

The effort is to make both the government and its most effected and respected institution, the Army, look weak.

Hezbollah claims the Army cannot protect Lebanon from Israel. That was an easy statement to make before, when the Army was not deployed in the south. Now that the Army is deployed and protecting Lebanon effectively, Hezbollah must find some way to make that Army, and the government behind it, look weak.

The Syrian Connection

Simultaneously, Hezbollah and Michel Aoun denounce the government, while calling for the creation of a "national unity" government.

Not only does creating a "national unity" government go entirely against precedent and undermine the democratic process, but it's a thinly guised veil to aid Hezbollah and Syria.

The government is currently limiting Hezbollah's power. The international community, particularly Arab countries, are exerting enormous influence over Syria and Hezbollah. If Hezbollah manages to get a position in the government, they will be able to:

1. Strengthen their military positions within Lebanon, thus undermining the 14 March coalition and the UN

2. Allow a window through which Syria can sneak back into the country

3. Stop the international tribunal to try Rafiq Hariri's assassins

The Syrian regime has been actively commenting on Lebanese politics, using threatening language about the UN presence and its effort to stop arms from flowing to Hezbollah, pushing for a "national unity" government, and meeting with Lebanese leaders calling for the overthrow of PM Saniora's government.

The public verbal attacks against the government coupled with the violent attacks against respected government institutions are part of the same campaign.

The instability is going to last.

21 comments:

Adam Ben Yoel said...

Good article Charles but I find it hard to believe that Syrian puppet president Lahoud's son in law defence minister Elias Murr is actually collecting their weapons.

Battal Agha said...

Very good article - I agree with you that the Army will now be the target of insinuations and provocations in order to show that it is not trusted. I believe that it is up to the officers' corps to show that they hold Lebanon above averything else and that they will indeed o their duty even if it means antagonizing Hezbollah. Would that happen? I do hope so -otherwise, Lebanon will be facing more difficult times

Anonymous said...

The Lebanese people have to come out and support the Army.
Freedom has its responsibilities, and kicking Syria and Hezbollah is the next phase in this strugle.........good luck...........

Omega80 said...

Do you really believe Michel Aoun wants the Syrians back in Lebanon? You can't be serious...

Anonymous said...

Omega,
Aoun doesn't want them back in Lebanon, but it a good compromise for a presidential seat. No?

Adam Ben Yoel said...

The Course of Aoun: Two National Pacts.

While Lebanon was only created as a country due to the Maronites, the destruction of their position in the Confessionalist Entity has lead to a split in those who remain (the majority of them having had their diaspora rights stolen from them). Since the Saudi-Syrian axis of the greater part of Vassal Lebanon have split, and Syria allied herself with the Iranian rulers of the South,, Bekaa and Southern Beirut, the confessional interest has changed. Many say that the country has split into confessionalists and secularists (incredibly dangerous to Lebanon and I'll tell you why in another post). The truth of the matter is as follows. Traditionally the interests of those who wanted/needed the Lebanese state and identity as a shield were on one side on average the greater part of those were Maronites, Melkites and small minority Christians. On the other side were those who originally embraced their Shami or 'Arab' (lol) identity but subsequently accomadated themselves to the Lebanon that the first group paid lip service to; the equal democratic entity. These on average consisted of the Sunnis and Greek Orthodox Christians. The Druze joined them despite their need of a seperate entity because of their age old power struggle with the Maronites and their working class position. Then we have the Shiites who were always poor and under represented. Many of them joined the first camp when the UNRWA Sunnis/Greek Orthodox non citizens flared up the brewing civil war. Alas due to our harsh occupation many joined a new camp. While the apparently stronger of their militias; HezbALLAH were originally a purely Lebanese sectarian interest entity, their patrons have turned them and their constiuency into their tools and allied them with the the UNRWA residents. However what has emerged since the Syrian occupation destroyed Maronite Lebanon and assasinated Hariri is the pact of the Sunnis-Confessionalist Maronites (and other Christians) and Druzes for what Assad did was not what was expected by the Sunnis. He not being a Sunni himself decided it may be a good idea to empower and ally the Shiites, all the while the Saudis had become the patron of the Sunnis. Those on the new March 14th national pact are the US and France through Saudi group of accomadationalist confessionalists. The Aoun initiative: General Michel Aoun has always been a strong backer of Lebanese sovereignty AS AN ALLY OF SECULAR ARABISM. He knows that Lebanon's link to the east runs through Syria OR as far as he's concerned G-d forbid; Israel (a far weaker link). As a man who oppossed Taif and sectarian interests he is now firstly very unhappy that a group of sectarian war criminals run the country under SAUDI patronage; anyone but Saudi. Why? Because like Iran is the mother of Shiite extremism, Saudi is the mother of Sunni extremism. This coupled with the fact that the traditional western approach of leave Assad in power for fear of a Sunni ruler is crumbling (even if it were not the promise of such a scenario looms for him) and that being the case he feels safer to be allied with the Shiites an the Alawite and have their patrons on the other side of the Sunni Syrian sea. It may appear that his policies are diametrically oppossed to those of the Shiite militia ie reempowerment of the Christian Diaspora and new electoral law etc but this is very short sighted. As the Lebanese have seen and unfortunately lost faith in us and gained mistrust, we Israel are untrustworthy sectarian allies and that is something I am very unhappy about. His options are Syria/Iran and Saudi/West. The Saudi backed group are the new version of the original Sunni/Orthodox block whereas the original Maronite block is no more. He knows that like himself; the secularist banner is for the Shiites a means to rule the country. As such he must kiss their feet in order to establish his new national pact with them and gain their trust. He prefers a Maronite-Shiite national pact as local minorities as oppossed to a Maronite-Sunni-Druze one. For him and his consituents, the west has stabed them in the back too much for their own interests.

Adam Ben Yoel said...

The Course of Aoun: Two National Pacts.

While Lebanon was only created as a country due to the Maronites, the destruction of their position in the Confessionalist Entity has lead to a split in those who remain (the majority of them having had their diaspora rights stolen from them). Since the Saudi-Syrian axis of the greater part of Vassal Lebanon have split, and Syria allied herself with the Iranian rulers of the South,, Bekaa and Southern Beirut, the confessional interest has changed. Many say that the country has split into confessionalists and secularists (incredibly dangerous to Lebanon and I'll tell you why in another post). The truth of the matter is as follows. Traditionally the interests of those who wanted/needed the Lebanese state and identity as a shield were on one side on average the greater part of those were Maronites, Melkites and small minority Christians. On the other side were those who originally embraced their Shami or 'Arab' (lol) identity but subsequently accomadated themselves to the Lebanon that the first group paid lip service to; the equal democratic entity. These on average consisted of the Sunnis and Greek Orthodox Christians. The Druze joined them despite their need of a seperate entity because of their age old power struggle with the Maronites and their working class position. Then we have the Shiites who were always poor and under represented. Many of them joined the first camp when the UNRWA Sunnis/Greek Orthodox non citizens flared up the brewing civil war. Alas due to our harsh occupation many joined a new camp. While the apparently stronger of their militias; HezbALLAH were originally a purely Lebanese sectarian interest entity, their patrons have turned them and their constiuency into their tools and allied them with the the UNRWA residents. However what has emerged since the Syrian occupation destroyed Maronite Lebanon and assasinated Hariri is the pact of the Sunnis-Confessionalist Maronites (and other Christians) and Druzes for what Assad did was not what was expected by the Sunnis. He not being a Sunni himself decided it may be a good idea to empower and ally the Shiites, all the while the Saudis had become the patron of the Sunnis. Those on the new March 14th national pact are the US and France through Saudi group of accomadationalist confessionalists. The Aoun initiative: General Michel Aoun has always been a strong backer of Lebanese sovereignty AS AN ALLY OF SECULAR ARABISM. He knows that Lebanon's link to the east runs through Syria OR as far as he's concerned G-d forbid; Israel (a far weaker link). As a man who oppossed Taif and sectarian interests he is now firstly very unhappy that a group of sectarian war criminals run the country under SAUDI patronage; anyone but Saudi. Why? Because like Iran is the mother of Shiite extremism, Saudi is the mother of Sunni extremism. This coupled with the fact that the traditional western approach of leave Assad in power for fear of a Sunni ruler is crumbling (even if it were not the promise of such a scenario looms for him) and that being the case he feels safer to be allied with the Shiites an the Alawite and have their patrons on the other side of the Sunni Syrian sea. It may appear that his policies are diametrically oppossed to those of the Shiite militia ie reempowerment of the Christian Diaspora and new electoral law etc but this is very short sighted. As the Lebanese have seen and unfortunately lost faith in us and gained mistrust, we Israel are untrustworthy sectarian allies and that is something I am very unhappy about. His options are Syria/Iran and Saudi/West. The Saudi backed group are the new version of the original Sunni/Orthodox block whereas the original Maronite block is no more. He knows that like himself; the secularist banner is for the Shiites a means to rule the country. As such he must kiss their feet in order to establish his new national pact with them and gain their trust. He prefers a Maronite-Shiite national pact as local minorities as oppossed to a Maronite-Sunni-Druze one. For him and his consituents, the west has stabed them in the back too much for their own interests.

VP said...

"Good article Charles but I find it hard to believe that Syrian puppet president Lahoud's son in law defence minister Elias Murr is actually collecting their weapons."

Not surprising, it's all staged.

Fares said...

Please Send this Message to Dr Salim Al Hoss

J said...

"When the army acted - even when they killed civilians, as occured during the benzene riots of 2004 - it had the full support of Lebanese citizens."

What a masterpiece. The full support of the Lebanese ctizens... Did it have the full support of the people who died that day? Or the full support of the people who were shot and killed last week?
Keep it up.
Are you coming back to Lebanon anytime soon by the way?

Adam Ben Yoel said...

Please for the love of G-d give me feedback on my Aoun theory! It's dricing me maaaaad. Why would someone who called Hezb a terrorist organizaiton and fought against Syria make alliances with them? For the Presidential position? It doesn't make sense. President of what? Of an entity that he fought hard to prevent the establishment of? Or perhaps he cut a deal with Syria. That also doesn't make sense for the same reason. I heard that the Hariri Martyr bloc cut a deal with the US in 05 to allow him to be Pres but downgrade further the powers of the Pres.

Kodder said...

hmm... one article that I do not agree with you at all.

Anonymous said...

instead of discussing the merits of Aoun, start planning on how to disarm Hezbollah.........If you think that Nasrallah is home planning to be a good boy and join the legitimate gov.start disarming slowly the fringes of his supporters.If you do not fight him he will be back in no time. Iran NEEDS him................

Solomon2 said...

Omega80, where have you been? I've wanted to read your opinion on Lebanese matters for months now!

Charles Malik said...

BA,

Trusting the officer corps is not something I'm likely to do.

The Army broke up quickly during the Lebanese civil war. Lebanon's sectarian system coupled with the wasta system placed under Syrian rule for 30 years means that the officer corps has had to make numerous compromises along the way. Their lingering attachments could pull the Army apart.

Thank God, the zuama class has decided to stay together. The Army will remain strong as long as the factions in Lebanon decide to remain united.

Charles Malik said...

ABY,

Very interesting article on the two national pacts.

You understand the dynamics of Lebanon better than most of your countrymen, AND most Lebanese.

Charles Malik said...

J,

I knew I'd get a comment like that.

BTW, are you the great "Jamal" himself?

Anonymous said...

The Lebanese must realize the
Israel has no intention of entering
Lebanon unprovoked again ....

So the Lebanese army can protect
Lebanaon from the Israelis
simply by controlling the border.

Its a ploy by Hezbolla to
ridicule the army ...

Can the Canadian army protect
Canada from a US invasion ???

Well it does not have to unless
a bunch of Canadians get really stupid.

The simple fact is Lenbanon
has nothing to fear from Israel
negotiate for prisoner release
and Shebba farms quietly behind the scenes ... accept international
aid and support to rebuild ...
and make sure Hezbolla
leaves the Israelis alone.

Adam Ben Yoel said...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3318289,00.html

(Article 'Saudis Meet Syrian Opposition Leaders') As I've been saying the end is nigh for Assad.

Adam Ben Yoel said...

Charles. My opinion of the Lebanese in general (I mean those in Lebanon) is that they are smart, cultured reasonable people in extreme denial and stuck in a difficult situation. I believe that many Shiites have experienced a sort of cognitive 'Palestinianization' in the sense of their reflex hatred of Israel. Most Israelis don't understand the situation in Lebanon. Their image of the country is dated to say the least. Many still think that there is a Christian majority. Never the less, while it is gravely dangerous on an internal level for Lebanon to make a peace deal with Israel, Israelis as a democracy wouldn't and didn't stand for any designs on controling Lebanon and from that point of view the country will ALWAYS be safe from us. There is a tendancy in Lebanon to believe that we are affraid of competition from such a similarly resourceful country. For the most part, nothing could be further from the truth. It is more important to have the most similar country in the region in a state of mutual prosperity with us. PS. Olmert, Peretz and Halutz are dicks. I am right wing. Do not forget that the settlements were started by the left and the right did the Gaza disengagement and gave up the Sinai to Egypt.

Adam Ben Yoel said...

RE the UNRWA camps in Lebanon:-
Unlike other Arabic speaking countries, Lebanon barely fought us in the war of indep and didn't fight us in the six day war. Lebanon did all it could to prevent the exodos of it's Jews. As such the camps were an act of charity, not responsibility. They are also an issue demographiclly. I think that Israelis know this.