الأحد، 19 يناير، 2014

Why “Only Christians Can Save Lebanon” is Not Applicable

I liked the first section of the new article “”Why “Only Christians Can Save Lebanon””” because it is a very real caption of our ill communities. I liked to reply by a blogpost.
The comments and discussion were on the first article’s idea, with all due respect to Nadine EL Ali, the article’s writer, and with support of the good elaboration of the messy political situation in Lebanon and the region..
In a reply to the first article “Only Christians Can Save Lebanon” on twitter, and after a common friend shared it, I’ve corrected simply one information in the article, and got away from the sectarianism discussion, because it’s becoming nauseous, but I felt that the thought – especially in these days – is a joke.
And that’s why.



Let us pass the Lebanese civil war, and talk about its results, just to get to the causes of “”Why “Only Christians Can Save Lebanon” is Not Applicable””.
After Taef arrangement, the Lebanese political atmosphere was divided between a majority – supported by the Syrian regime – which shared governance and divided the benefits, and a minority – reluctant for the Syrian presence in Lebanon – which became oppressed during the 90s and the beginning of the 21st century.
If we are talking about sectarian communities in Lebanon, it’s not sectarianism, but the Political structure of the company is built on this basis.. That’s why, we can say that most of the Sunnite were supporting the ex Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, and most of the Druze supported Walid Jumblatt, while the Shiite were divided between Amal movement – as the political wing – which controlled the Speaker of the Parliament position since 1992, and Hezbollah – as the military wing – which dominated the resistance against Israel in Southern Lebanon, till the Israeli sudden retreat in 2000. Then, Hezbollah entered the political scene.

This status quo started to change with the “Maronite Bishops statement” in 2000, and Michel Aoun testimony in front of the American Congress which led to the resolution 1559 “the Lebanese struggle with Syria for what it truly is: a fight for freedom against terrorism and oppression” in 2003, and the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri, attracted the international – especially American, French, and British – support to help mainly the Christians to achieve their goals of freedom and descent living, and to help them come back from exile (Michel Aoun), get out of the prison (Samir Geagea), and get up from under the oppression (Amine Gemayel).. the others were floating downstream.

Nowadays, the international community is still supporting the Christians, while Sunnite are supported by KSA and Shiite are supported by Iran.
But in the internal play, The agreement between Hezbollah and FPM is a Political/Sectarian cover for Hezbollah’s decisions inside and outside Lebanon.
The relation between Future Movement and Lebanese Forces is beyond political measures, the visits of Geagea to some arab countries, and the cover ups on Future Movement failures is exchanges services.
Al Marada’s leader Sleiman Franjieh, assured that he will not leave Assad alone in his bad times, because He (Assad) always supported him.
Felange leader Amine Gemayel, and his son Sami, are running the play with Future Movement.
The “Single” Christian Politicians are – just like other non Christian politicians - following a big party so they can have a seat in the parliament.

So, what sort of change will the Christians change to Save Lebanon?
And what kind of solutions will they bring if each and every section of them is following a different Non-Christian leader as a head of the Group (8 & 14 March).

Sorry if it was a long post, but it was for spotlighting some issues.