National Unity

 

We recently had the opportunity to visit the sit-in demonstration in Beirut.  We felt instantly welcome.  As we walked through the massive squares, we saw Lebanese of every sort living side by side in this tented community.  There were Druze, Shia, Sunni, Maronite and Greek Orthodox.  There were members of Amal, Communist Party, El Marada, Hezbollah, Populist Party, Socialist Party, Tayyar and more.  There was a quiet sense of cooperation and harmony.  As is usual in Lebanon, people were visiting each other, serving coffee and nargile to their neighbours, and smiling at any passers-by.  When the evening’s speakers and singers began, all the people, many wearing their personal political colours, moved even closer together and started waving the Lebanese flag.  If such is their vision for the future of Lebanon, I would say this is truly a better and more peaceful Lebanon.

 

                         

 

 

 

 

 

After the crisis of the summer’s Israeli aggression against Lebanon, it became more important than ever that Lebanon’s diverse communities work together to rebuild this beautiful country. Great hope was seen in the simple act of different political/religious entities together cleaning away the rubble and ruin.  With rags, brooms, and wheel-barrows they worked as neighbours for the good of all.

 

This renewed sense of patriotism was soon tested.  External force had failed to create Condoleezza Rice’s vision of a “new Middle East.”  (“It is time for a new Middle East,” she said. “It is time to say to those that don’t want a different kind of Middle East that we will prevail. They will not.” 25/7/06 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14018618).  The very source of the war—the desire of Israel/USA/UK to set the internal political workings of Lebanon—soon resorted to an alternate plan to achieve its goal.

 

In the process of rebuilding their nation, the Lebanese people urged a truly representative government that would work for the good of all the Lebanese people.  But the Israel/USA/UK conglomerate were determined to have their way.  Having sent bombs just months earlier, they now sent their dignitaries to announce their unfailing support of the existing Lebanese Government.   The parties who had waged a savage war on Lebanon now shouted that the Lebanese could not themselves design their own government.  Who, one has to ask, would have the best interests of the Lebanese people at heart?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The severity of foreign interference is clear.  US President Bush states “The United States has staunchly supported the Siniora government” and states that “Any attempt to destabilize Lebanon's democratically-elected government through such tactics as manufactured demonstrations. . .would, at the very least, be a clear violation of Lebanon's sovereignty and United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1559, 1680, and 1701.”  He then delivers $10.5 million in military goods to fulfil his pledge that the CIA and other US intelligence agencies would fund anti-Hezbollah groups in Lebanon and pay for activists who support the Siniora government (http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=36467; and http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/11/20061101-1.html; and http://beirut.usembassy.gov/lebanon/PRrodmen.html; and  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/10/wleb10.xml;  and http://theswoop.net/sys/article.php?art_ID=1031&color=1)  

 

 

                         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But didn’t President Bush also say “We understand that the hundreds of thousands of people who took to the street to express their desire to be free required courage, and we support the desire of the people to have a government responsive to their needs and a government that is free, truly free”? Of course he did.  But that was because those people were speaking for the Cedar Revolution, which served his purposes.  The hundreds of thousands of people who took to the street on 1 December 2006, and who remain there still, he accuses of being in “clear violation of Lebanon's sovereignty.”

(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060418-2.html; and

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/11/20061101-1.htm)

 

It is the contention of Friends of Lebanon, however, that a democracy respects the voice of all the people. Both groups of people have the right and the responsibility to publicly demonstrate their concerns.  This is democracy in action!  Granted some of the Lebanese forming the current government are content with the status quo.  But only if we can all speak can we have a dialogue.  It is only through dialogue that we can move forward to a better and more peaceful Lebanon.

 

Not only have hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens of Lebanon taken their concerns to the streets over the past two months, but those citizens are represented by public leaders as diverse as the citizens themselves: (labels strictly for illustration!) Michel Aoun (Maronite), Nabih Berri (Shia), Abdul Rahman Bisiri (Sunni), Talal Erslan (Druze), Sleiman Frangieh (Maronite), Salim Hoss (Sunni), Omar Karameh (Sunni), President Emile Lahoud (Maronite), Hassan Nasralla (Shia), Fathi Yakan (Sunni).  This is far from the Iranian-staged coup d’état that the Western media would like to sell us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If such a significant number of the country’s population believe that changes should be made, then a representative government would engage in open and honest dialogue in order to resolve the issues at hand.  A country’s government should be accountable to its own people and only its own people.  Neither Israel/USA/UK, nor Syria, nor Jordan, nor Egypt, nor Iran, nor Iraq, nor Saudi Arabia, nor any other foreign government should influence the internal affairs of Lebanon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Lebanese call for a Unity Government is a call for a truly democratic government, representing and serving all of the Lebanese people.  A new, honest and open, election is necessary.  The new government should seek equity in the decision-making process.  It should seek a better economical situation that at once reduces the national debt and provides appropriate social, educational, and medical services for all of Lebanon.  It should seek to facilitate the international inquiry into the February 2005 assassination of Rafik Hariri.  It should seek to liberate Lebanese territory and Lebanese prisoners still held by Israel.  It should seek to eliminate illegal fly-overs by Israeli planes.  Above all, the new government should respect the integrity and the autonomy of the Lebanese people.

 

On 1/12/06 when the demonstration began, Michel Aoun explained their action:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“We do not seek to isolate [the ministers in Grand Serail] and we do not seek to monopolize power. Nor do we seek to obtain personal or even sectarian interests. . . . It is a shame and a disgrace to separate between a confession and another as we have met under the Lebanese flag and we are proud of this; in front of the entire world we are not ashamed of our national principles. . . . I call on you to support our mission of change and reform and the preservation of free decision making and of the rights of the Lebanese people, all the Lebanese people. The rights of the Lebanese people should not be subjected to favoritism and confessionalism or political affiliation. These are absolute rights that all the governments should safeguard and for all the people, supporters and opponents. . . . Today we are suffering from an isolation campaign waged against us as if those in power intend to create a confrontation. But we do not want this confrontation. We seek openness in order to reach a national unity in which all the Lebanese people take part.”  (full text of speech at http://www.voltairenet.org/article144278.html)

 

The Opposition General Strike on 23/1/07 has, everyone would concede, been a passionate event.  It brings hope that the Lebanese are so engaged in their political system.  The discord of the day, though, shows that there are indeed issues that need to be resolved.  Surely new elections and sincere dialogue are the way to move forward to a better and more peaceful Lebanon.  As President Emile Lahoud has stated,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“the only way to break the current political deadlock is to renew political life in Lebanon through the establishment of a national unity government that inks a fair electoral law leading to early parliamentary elections that reflect a true representation of all of the country's parties." (reported by Nafez Qawas, Daily Star correspondent, Thursday, January 11, 2007) http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=78433