Home  Opinion Lebanon's False Unity, but Christian-Shia bond real |
|
Lebanon's False Unity, but Christian-Shia bond real |
|
|
Written by Lebanese Political Journal
|
Lebanon's False Unity, but Christian-Shia bond real
Lebanese politicians claim that Lebanon is united. They refuse to discuss the specifics of the war until a ceasefire is called. This is similar to the Israeli epigram, "once the bombs fall, the debate stops."
This is entirely false if one looks at what is happening on the ground. Hezbollah is supporting the majority of refugees from the south. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt is making a big deal about taking Shia families into Druze regions, but the refugees are forced to rent, and their aid supplies come from Hezbollah, not Druze.
In Beirut, even the New York Times contends that the Sunni population in Saniyah refuses to even look at the Shia refugees living across the street from them in the Saniyah public park, although the Sunni will claim to be united when asked.
Leftist groups coordinated through Zico House are aiding the refugees in Beirut, but their forces are cannot compare with those of the traditional Lebanese political parties, like Hezbollah.
However, Michel Aoun's Tayyar Wataniya al-Hur, the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), is taking in Shia refugees, welcoming them into their homes, supplying them with aid, and assisting refugees who've sought refuge in Beirut's public schools.
The FPM and Hezbollah signed a paper of understanding with each other that seems to have incredibly reduced sectarian tensions. By and large, the Christian population is angry at Hezbollah, horrified at the destruction of Lebanon, and uninterested in waging war against Israel, but they are carefully playing their cards in an effort to rise to the top of the sectarian divide in Lebanon.
The current conflict rests atop a sea of unresolved issues that pre-date even the Lebanese civil war. Racism, sectarian animosity, feelings of oppression and neglect run deep in Lebanon. Christian support for Shia refugees is smoothing out some of these differences. The Shia population is in need and Christian supporters of Michel Aoun are coming to their support. Aoun already had support in the Shia community, but he is now widely respected.
Usually, sects are seen as being in alliance if the political leadership come to an agreement. But the people have no place in this exchange. So, if the leaders break apart, the people have never formed any bond. One meeting between Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and Christian former militia leader Samir Geagea is seen as creating an alliance, but the communities still share hatred of each other.
The FPM and Hezbollah, two political parties not based on the traditional feudal structure of Lebanese political support, are bridging the gap and making a marked change in the fabric of the Lebanese political system.
Hezbollah's support comes from its power independent of the state. They have their own military and intelligence apparatus. They have their own social services sector. They have their own financial resources. They do not need the Lebanese government. The Shia community looks to Hezbollah before they look to the Lebanese government.
Contrarily, Michel Aoun wants to control the Lebanese government. Christians went from having complete control of Lebanon from 1920-1970 (until the end of Charles Helou's presidency, but this is a separate argument) to having no governmental power during Syria's tenure. To take power back, ie to have complete control of Lebanon and the Lebanese state, he will need a mechanism through which he can incorporate Hezbollah into the state, thus reducing their influence and placing their independent power into his hands.
However, Aoun is not trying to strengthen the state in the name of Christians. He's trying to change the entire Lebanese political process. It's not the Christians he is trying to empower, but the nation (and, obviously, himself).
The 14 March coalition failed because they tried to maintain the old system of political exchange in which leaders make all of the decisions without responding to the needs of their communities. In this exchange, Hezbollah could easily reign over all others. They had weapons. They had hearts and minds. And Druze and Sunni sectarian political parties had no mechanism to bring in Shia supporters.
If civil war is avoided and if Hezbollah is to be disarmed, it will most likely come about through the person to person bonds being made right now between Christians and Shia.
Hezbollah is a political reality in Lebanon. Even if Israel is able to fully destroy Hezbollah's military capacity, which is doubtful, the Shia population will still support the same people and ideologies that got us into this mess. Iran and Syria will continue to capitalize on this, and their is little any international force could do to stop this. The 14 March coalition will fail again.
The FPM is working to counter this from the base. They are building an alternative to Hezbollah.
http://lebop.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Madness takes over Lebanon.
Militants are fighting in the streets of Beirut. Military guns are on both sides. What is the prospect of such a situation. Aren't the Lebanese fed-up with wars?
23 November 2007
Lebanese President Emile Lahoud left the Baabda presidential palace without handing over the power to a new president. This is the first time since independence in 1943. |
advertisements
|
