Who are the Gemayels?
Before we deconstruct the assassination of Pierre Gemayel in Beirut two days ago, we need to go back in history, to 1982.
September 15, 1982. Israeli occupation forces in Lebanon, commanded by Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, surround two large Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut. The names of the camps are Sabra and Shatila. No one is allowed in or out.
Israeli forces are allied with one faction of Lebanese, the Maronite Christian Phalangists, who have maintained an Israeli-supported militia along Lebanon’s southern border.
Lebanon, formerly an enclave of Syria, was under direct French control from the end of WWI until 1943. By the time it received its tentative independence from France, the French has guaranteed the domination of the then-majority Christians over the government, its adminsitrative apparatuses, and the economy. As greater and greater numbers of Muslims populated Lebanon, driven significantly by mass exlusions of Palestinians from Palestine (Israel) and Jordan (where many Plaestinian refugees originally went after being pushed out by the Israelis), this control was contested.
Those attempts at resolving inequalities between Christan and Muslim resulted in sometimes violent reaction from the Christians, who clung jealously to their power. The close cultural ties between Syria (the Muslim-majority portion of the former French Mandate) and Muslims in Lebanon led directly to strong ties between Muslims under attack from Christian rightsts (organized as early as 1938 into the Kataeb Social Democratic Party, “Phalange” for short, by a Lebanese Christian strongman named Pierre Gemayel), and to Syrian intervention in the affairs of its former enclave.
Pierre Gemayel was a big fan of Spain’s fasicst dictator, Francisco Franco, and organized the Phalangists in a nearly identical structure to the Spanish Phalange. This is the Party that the US government, CNN, and both US political parties now tout as the hope of Lebanese democracy.
Pierre’s son, Bachir Gemayel, continued the Phalangist legacy, and organized Phalangist militias. In August, 1982, Bachir had just been elected president, in Christian-run elections that Muslims boycotted, at the height of a bloody civil war, now involving Lebanese Muslims, Christians, Druze, Palestinians, the Israelis, and the Syrians.
Gemayel had “run” for election on the promise to smash the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).
September 14, 1982, nine days before Bashir Gemayal was due to take office, he was assassinated with a bomb, ostensibly by a Lebanese Christian working for the Syrians, named Habib Tanious Shartouni.
But the Phalangists’ enemies were the Palestinians.
There was a swift reaction obviously coordinated with Sharon’s Israeli military. That brings us back to:
September 15, 1982. Israeli occupation forces in Lebanon, commanded by Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, surround two large Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut. The names of the camps are Sabra and Shatila. No one is allowed in or out. Revenge was on the minds of the Phalangists, and in coordination with the Israeli cordon sanitaire around the Sabra and Shatila camps, the Phalangists entered on the afternoon of Spetember 16th.
For the next two days, until 8 PM, September 18th, they rampaged through the camps, dragging men, women, and children from their shanty-houses and hiding places and killing them.
Israeli troops, who were part of the cordon, would claim that even though they knew the circumstances after Gemayel’s asassination, even though they had allowed the Phalange militia to enter, even though they heard the screams and shots for over 36 hours, they had no idea what was happening in Sabra and Shatila.
During hours of darkenss, at the request of the Phalangists, Israeli troops fired parachute flares over the camps to assist the Phalangists with illumination.
Phalange Commander Elie Hobeika was overheard by an Israeli soldier telling a subordinate who had asked what to do with the women and children, “This is the last time you’re going to ask me a question like that; you know exactly what to do.” This reply was accompanied by laughter from other Phalangist militamen.
Palestinians who tried to flee the camps were turned back by Israeli troops.
Israelis claim that 700-800 were killed. The BBC put the number at 800. Later researchers put the number closer to 1,300.
Among Lebanese Muslims, who constitute a majority (55%), in addition to aroudn 200,000 displaced Palestinians, the Phalange tradition embodied by Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel, nephew of Bachir Gemayel, is perceived as anything but democratic. Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel was assassinated two days ago in Beirut, and now we hear the outcry from UN Ambassador and world-class asshole John Bolton about Gemayel being part of some longstanding struggle for Lebanese democracy, and nary a mention of how the Phalange tradition has been one of support for the US-Israeli axis against Muslims.
Instead, we hear the same drumbeat, the same demonizations of the only allies Lebanese Muslims have been able to count upon in defense against these imperial-comprador depredations: Syria, on behalf of the Lebanese Sunnis in the North, Hamas and the PLO on behalf of the Palestinians, and Southern Shia Hezbollah — perhaps the most authentic grassroots Lebanese popular formation in the country, which has now commited the unforgiveable sin, defeating Israel in combat.
That this assassination comes just as the immensely popular Hezbollah is mounting a successful capaign to take down the US-”supported” government in Lebanon should not go unnoticed. And the possibility of a “false flag” operation should not yet be discounted, as Syria and Iran — next on the US target list (if they can ever extricate themselves from the ongoing defeat in Iraq) — are being promoted in the US media and by the US government as the heavies.
Ify:
I see shabra and shatila like escapades are like war men amusement parks. My favorite are christian men who think rape is funny and to be dismissed. Which is why thousands of women come to the altar after being raped and sodomized only to be dismissed. I wish I knew you gentlemen enjoy rape, sexual abuse, forced sodomy, and murder a little earlier. Actually men really do enjoy rape and murder. It is fun to you all. And their is no shortage of fundamentalist leaders, men and women to excuse the gentlemen’s behavior. This is quite a rude awakening for me I must admit. Justice is elusive and only comes in droplets. I wish I knew this earlier. I would have learned how to use guns. Oh well I will be teaching girls how to shoot. AT age three.
23 November 2006, 12:00 amProudNeoCon:
Stan,
I have read many of your post and usually disagree with them. However this is a first time when I believe you are purposely misrepresenting the factual information:
1. “Lebanon, formerly an enclave of Syriaâ€
This is completely wrong. The only part of Lebanon which di belong to Syria is Beqaa Valey. The rest has never been a part of Syria. They were different kindoms during the Crusaids and they were different countries during Muslim rule. Only when Ottoman empire took over the region did they disagnate did they create terretory called “Greater Syria†which included terretories of modern Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel. But even then Syria and Lebanon remained a separate provinces. During 1500-1700 they had fought several wars as Syrian governors tried to control Lebanon with no success.
2 “Jordan (where many Plaestinian refugees originally went after being pushed out by the Israelis),â€
Israel has never occupied Jordan, therefore it could not push Palestinians out. In fact, PLO attempted a coup against Jordanian king and after loosing a 10-day long battle with Jordanian army had to retreat into Lebanon
3. You make it sounds as there were no problems until 1982. In fact the civil war started in 1975 when “On the morning of April 13, 1975, unidentified gunmen in a speeding car fired on a group of Phalangist leaders leaving Church in the Christian Beirut suburb of Ain Rumaneh, killing four people in what was probably an attempt on the life of Pierre Gemayel.†Then in 1976 Palestinians destroyed and massacred the christian (phalangists) town of Damour.
Wikipedia has a good description of the event:
“Most of the inhabitants managed to flee during the assault, but a number stayed behind as the Palestinian forces seized control of the town. The attackers destroyed the buildings in the seaside village systematically and then took revenge on the remaining Christian inhabitants. The Christian cemetery was destroyed, coffins dug up, the dead robbed, vaults opened, and bodies and skeletons thrown across the graveyard. The church was burnt and an outside wall was covered with a mural of Fatah guerrillas holding AK47 rifles. A portrait of Yasser Arafat was placed at one end. Other sources claim that the church was used as a repair garage for PLO vehicles, and also as a range for shooting-practice with targets painted on the eastern wall of the nave.
23 November 2006, 12:55 amTwenty Phalangist militiamen were executed and then civilians were lined up against a wall and sprayed with machine-gun fire. An unknown number of women were raped, babies shot at close range, and bodies were mutilated and dismembered. None of the remaining inhabitants surviveâ€
This is not to say that Phalangists did not participate in the massacres of their own. However to suggest that Phalangiss/Christians is somehow a “bad†part of Lebanon is wrong. Lebanon had one of the agliest civil wars were all sided did some horrible things.
Ify:
If Christians did this thing by the way I am very embarrassed. Murder and rape unprovoked. Anyway I have suspecting this from listening to “leaderships” comments smirked suffering is good. And having a funny way about sneering sinning/evil behavior against other people. Like sneering about victimology and loser. Oh well. So know we know everybody is the same. I mean everybody. I think as I obsessed before, what troubles me most about these escapades, is that I have seen in the term “secular humanism” and masculine Christianity, which is samething as ALL FORMS OF RELIGIOUS fundamentalism, is men trying to establish the right to rape and murder. A advocacy for raping girls for birthrates. An dismissivness of human rights. Being truely happy when women cry and scream when being raped. A kind of excitement at hurting other people and joking about it. Being happy about putting women in corners and raping and sodomizing them in secret places until they die. And never fighting the person raping. Never. Not like Maya Angelous deacoms. Trying to find a flaw in the other person that says, we should be able to murder and rape you. All races, especially when they are patriarchal act this way. They complain when it happens to them, but jump at the chance to do it to someone else. And what is especially disappointing about Christianity is their efforts to make sure that basic justice is not advocated for. When the MLK/Exodus justice struggle is needed internationally we only see gay rights and abortion international along with excuse making and making light of murder and rape.
23 November 2006, 3:05 amthor:
I read this because I’m a Huff. Post reader and yet I found this disgraceful. There is some authority or article referenced, without any citation. What kind of scrupulous or serious scholar
You make it seem like Gemayel deserved to be killed. Finally, you conclude on a conspiracy theory note, pointing out that it might very well have been America or Israel that conducted this assassination. Yes, it is logically possible, but the more plausible inference — nowhere even contemplated — is that Syria is trying to eliminate anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians, that is, politicans working for Lebanese autonomy against the Syrian desire to make Lebanon a satrapy.
The UN security council — hardly a pro-Israel or pro-Yank hotbed — today voted to probe Syria’s role in the murder of Lebanese politicians.
You are certainly feral. Whether you are a scholar is another, more moot, matter. Sheesh.
23 November 2006, 4:23 amTellurian:
The criticism by the neocons and others ignore the central point that the Phalangists are acting as agents fro the imperialist West and Israel. And have conducted masscres in conjuction with them. This is a central component of what the Bushites call Democracy.
23 November 2006, 11:05 amProudNeoCon:
to Tellurian:
“The criticism by the neocons and others ignore the central point that the Phalangists are acting as agents fro the imperialist West and Israel.”
Phalangists existed way before Israel even existed. This is a party of Maronite Christians who existed in Lebanon since 5th century, hundreds of years before Islam was created. During the first Islamic rule they have hiden in the mountains, where they were found by Crusaiders. They supported the crusaides and were always largest force in the Lebanon.
The civil war started mainly because of the huge influx of armed Palestinians after their failed attempted coup in Jordan. In the begining Phalangists were suported by both Israel and Syria (Syria and Israel on one side!!!). Once Syria got 40,000 troops in Lebanon as a “Arab’s league peacekeepers it switched it’s alliance to PLO” that left Israel as the only friendly force to Christians. In 1982 Phalangist welcomed Israeli army into Lebanon as they saw it the only way to get PLO and Syria our of their country. Once Israel withdrew, PLO was kicked out, but Syria has never left because international forces send to enforce the agreement left after Beirut bombings of French and American bases. After that Phalangist lunch “liberation” war against Syria attempting to liberate the country but lost…
MODERATOR’s NOTE: Where did the Phalangists get their name? It’s in the article. They are an openly fascist party.
23 November 2006, 1:26 pmProudNeoCon:
Last point Pierre Gemayel was 34 years old. He was less than 15 during the Lebanese civil war and never participate in any action. Even assuming that some members of Gemayel family were guilty of some ugly things during civil war since when do we justify the murder of the son by the past action of his father?
MODERATOR’S NOTE: No one has tried to justify the killing. We tried to make some counterpoints to the US-Israeli propaganda, which was turning into unabashed hagiography.
23 November 2006, 1:30 pmansel:
Good points Stan. But you characterize Hezbollah as an authentic ally of the Lebanese, it might be worth reading this article.
MODERATOR’s NOTE: Hexbollah is a genuine GRASSROOTS organization, largely representing the southern Shia communities. Terms like “authentic ally of the Lebanese” (as fithere is one homogenized mass) were never used. the southern Shia, however, ARE Lebanese, last time I checked.
23 November 2006, 1:41 pmIfy:
One thing though. What would democracy in Lebanon look like with the Christians running it and what would democracy look like with Hezbollah running it. What about 2006. Did the young Gemayel behave like his grandfather. Israel and US still have a better system of governance and better human rights than the rest of the middle east. And as a woman I have to take that seriously. Thor was right also.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: Unless you happen to be a Palestinian woman at an Israeli checkpoint. Since whenis racial Apartheid a “better system of governance” than anything?
23 November 2006, 2:10 pmMarilyn Farhat:
To ProudNeoCon:
I am a Lebanese American and was 15 years old when the Civil War started in Lebanon. I have read with interest your information on the different histories and events of the region. While they may be partially factually true, they are grossly misleading and full of important omissions. I will address only a few due to space and time constraints:
1- There was no such thing as “Greater Syria.†What there was during the Ottoman empire were different “provinces.†One of those provinces was Syria which was comprised of what are now Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan. Within that province was a stretch of mountains known as Mount Lebanon “Jabal Lubnan†which was mostly inhabited by Christians, the majority of whom were Maronites. This stretch of mountains did not include the coastal cities of Byblos, Beirut, Sidon, or Tyre (Sur), neither did it include the Beka’ Valley or the Eastern mountain range of Lebanon. Basically, Mount Lebanon was an enclave, not a separate entity.
2- During the 19th Century, and with increasing relations with France specifically, the Maronites of Mount Lebanon were pushing for a larger peace of territory which they wanted to call “Greater Lebanon.†They wanted to include their control over the Muslim populations in their neighborhood. The coastal cities included most of the non-Christian population. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, an agreement was reached where Syria was divided between England and France under a mandate: France oversaw Lebanon and modern Syria and England oversaw Palestine (which later became Israel and the Occupied Territories) and Jordan.
3- On 22 November 1943, the Republic of Lebanon was formed and a Constitution was formulated . “Greater Lebanon†became the Republic of Lebanon with its capital in Beirut. The last official population census in the mandate territories was conducted in 1932 and showed a slight Christian majority within “Greater Lebanon.†To appease the Maronites, they were granted, unofficially, the control of political power of the new Lebanese Republic.
4- Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were killed, pushed out, or were forced to leave Palestine since the 1930s and 1940s. One of the largest exoduses was in 1948 in what was known as “Annakba,†or the “Catastrophe.†Many villagers and peasants were forced out of their lands by Jewish terrorist groups such as the Irgun. Many were led by the modern leaders of the Israeli state. Many of those refugees ended up in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. A second sudden mass exodus took place during the 1967 War. The bulk of the Palestinian refugees who went to Lebanon came in that year.
5- The Lebanese war did not start with the shooting at the Church. Trouble had been brewing for months before. There had been mass demonstrations of labor unions, and socialists and communists, the Vietnam War was coming to a close, the Palestinian guerillas were gaining more and more military power and were creating a “state within a state†inside Lebanon. There were a number of reasons for this: The Lebanese military was unable and unwilling to protect the Palestinian civilians in refugee camps in the cities of Lebanon during Israeli aerial bombardments (a very common occurrence during the 60s and 70s). The Arab community in general did not want to deal with the problem, so millions of dollars were funneled to the Lebanese politicians from Saudi and other Gulf countries who did not want to commit to the Palestinian struggle. The arming of the Palestinian refugees thus began with the consent of the Lebanese government under the leadership of the Maronite and Sunni Elite. Authority was given at the government and regional levels for the Palestinians to arm themselves with heavy artillery within Lebanon, thus began the problems with the PLO and other groups. Add to that the increasing disparity between those in power and the poor and mainly Shi’ite populations of the South. As a result, Imam Musa Sadr, a Shi’ite Imam educated in Iran, established Harakat Al Mahroumin (Movement of the Deprived or Dispossessed) whose military arm later became known as AMAL (a supporter of the United States, by the way), or Afwaj al Muqawamah al Lubnaniyyah (Lebanese Resistance Brigades). They are still in existence and are the rivals of Hezbollah although both are Shi’ite. AMAL is strictly secular. The other is not.
6- There was an attempt to conduct a second official census in the 1960s in Lebanon. Halfway through the counting process, when it was realized that the Muslims and especially the Shi’ites would far outnumber the Christians, the census was halted before its completion. To this day, there has not been an official census in Lebanon since 1932. Add to that, the Palestinians (most of whom have neither permanent residency nor citizenship in Lebanon, by the way) are mostly Muslim. Christian Palestinians and Armenian refugees (who were all Christian) were granted automatic Lebanese citizenship when they applied for it. Muslim Palestinians were denied it to keep the numbers skewed in favor of a Christian majority, which was unsuccessful.
7- As a result of the corruption, bribery, and the rising poor class which was mainly Shi’ites, coupled with the rising political tension and increase in racism among the Christian Fascist militias, arms were being smuggled into the country and dispersed across all party lines long before the first shot was fired and long before the first massacre was committed. There were nightly bombs going off in Beirut and other cities long before the Civil War started, and the Lebanese equivalent of the FBI, Al Maktab Athani (Deuxieme Bureau) was busy barging in on the different socialist and communist party offices and arresting the students and the leaders. We lived across the alley from one of those offices and police raids were commonplace. Israel and the United States financed the Christian right, the Saudis finance both, Syria went back and forth to maintain its control. Iran, Libya, Iraq, the Soviet Union, all had their darlings in the cesspool that was and continues to be Lebanon. CIA, KGB, MOSSAD, and their likes were roaming the streets of Lebanon on the prowl for the slightest bit of information and for the easiest and most lucrative innocent and not so innocent targets.
8- It is against such a backdrop that the Civil War started and, actually, the incident that sparked the war was the massacre on the bus of attendees who were returning from a political rally. Most of them were Palestinians driving through the mainly Christian neighborhood of Ain Errimmaneh. That came immediately after the church shooting and killing. They were ambushed by masked gunmen who fired on everyone on the bus. The sectarian killing of civilians started immediately after that.
9- The massacre of the Christian (and Muslim) inhabitants of the coastal town of Damour, South of Beirut was a reprehensible act committed by mainly Palestinians and Leftists, but it has to be understood within the context of the war. Damour was the first Christian militia controlled town to fall south of Beirut. It was the headquarters of the “Noumour al Ahrar†(the Free Tigers Movement), who later became archrivals of the Phalangists and were were killing each other all over the country. It came right after the massacres of the slums of Nab’a, Bourj Hammoud, Maslakh, and Karantina where mostly Shi’ites, Palestinians and Armenians lived. The Phalangists were able to capture those slums and massacred hundreds of people and kidnapped many more with the help of the Syrians. One of those kidnapped was my uncle. His body was never found, which brings me to another point.
10- There were two Syrian occupations of Lebanon. The first came in 1976 when the Christian militias were on the verge of losing the war. They begged for Syrian intervention through their president, Elias Franjieh. The Syrians did step in to help on the side of the Christian militias and proceeded to pummel the Palestinian camps and the Muslim neighborhoods with large Katyousha rockets (the ones that fire multiples at a time). Other factions in the conflict begged the Christian militias not to invite the Syrians into the conflict, without success. After the fall of the Southern slum areas into the hands of the Maronite militias, the Syrians stayed in one form or another in Lebanon and “vowed†to stay there until the conflict ended to “help†the Lebanese. Well, a couple of years later, the tables were turned and Syria allied itself with the Muslim militias against the Maronites, and we are where we are now because of it.
There is much racism in Lebanon and many of the Christian militias ended up killing each other (the Shamoun and Franjieh families) in the struggle for power and the right ideology. A few wanted a separatist ideology; others did not. In fact, the president elect, the first Bachir Jemayyil was killed by a rival Christian.
Eliek Hobaikah, a Lebanese Forces militia officer in 1982) actually led the massacre of Sabra and Shatila under the supervision of Ariel Sharon’s military (there is conflicting evidence as who is to blame more, Sharon or Hobeikah), but both were under investigation. http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles13.htm If you remember, Hobaikah was killed by a car bomb in 2002 just as he was set to testify against Ariel Sharon in a war crimes trial in Belgium. It is widely believed that the Mossad killed him. There was much recrimination going back and forth between the two. http://www.jcpa.org/art/brief1-17.htm
This whole charade in Lebanon right now is bogus. I was in Beirut the day Hariri was killed. The Cedar Revolution is far over-inflated. The Lebanese political system is still built on the feudal model where the children inherit their office from the fathers (despite the elections). In fact, Hezbollah is the only group that has managed to break that tendency. There is vast popular Lebanese and non-Lebanese support for Hezbollah across the globe and THAT is the reason the United States and Israel are trying to get rid of it. Most Hezbollah’s targets have been inside Lebanon against foreign invaders. They do not carry out operations outside their zones of occupation and, even in this last war with Israel, the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped inside contested territory (Sheb’a Farms).
There is much misinformation out there about the Lebanese conflict. It is too complicated to explain in on post. But I urge readers to go to a website to purchase DVDs on the Lebanese Civil War through http://www.arabfilm.com/ (Arab Film Distribution). They have other good films about the Middle East in general.
This post is too long now but is still not enough.
Recommended Reading:
1- Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict by Charles Smith http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-Arab-Israeli-Conflict-Charles-Smith/dp/0312404085
2- Pity the Nation: The Abduction of Lebanon, by Robert Fisk http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pity-Nation-Lebanon-at-War/dp/0192801309
23 November 2006, 10:50 pmJon Flanders:
“However to suggest that Phalangiss/Christians is somehow a “bad†part of Lebanon is wrong. Lebanon had one of the agliest civil wars were all sided did some horrible things.” Proud Necon
It’s not that the Maronites are inherently evil, the problem in Lebanon, going back much further than 1975 even, is that the Maronites, as a minority of the population, have run the country way past their expiration date. Their continued undemocratic hold on power is untenable and can’t continue without the active support of the US and Israel. See the article below for the background.
Stan’s piece should be seen in this historical context, which is never told by the mainstream media, for obvious reasons.
Jon Flanders
Published: 14/11/2006 12:00 AM (UAE)
Lebanon Muslims outnumber Christians 2 to 1
http://www.gulfnews.com/region/Lebanon/10082387.ht
Reuters
Beirut: Lebanon’s political system, which is once again in crisis, aims to share power equally between Christians and Muslims, but a survey published yesterday shows that Christians form only 35 per cent of the population.
Private statistician Yousuf Al Duweihi, a Mar-onite Christian, said his figures were based on identity registration records and electoral rolls throughout the country.
“This is scientific, not political,” he said by telephone from his north Lebanon home. “I want to tell the Lebanese this is Lebanon and if there is a problem, resolve it.”
According to his survey, published in the independent An Nahar newspaper, Lebanon has 4.855 million people, of whom just over 35 per cent are Christian, 29 per cent Shiite Muslim, 29 per cent Sunni Muslim and 5 per cent Druze.
Such figures are so sensitive in Lebanon that the last official census was conducted in 1932 during the French Mandate, which said Christians made up 55 per cent of the population.
Time to discuss
Al Duweihi, a mathematician, said his survey showed Lebanon’s demography was at odds with the power-sharing setup. “It’s time to discuss the political system and the electoral law,” he said.
His figures appeared at a time of political crisis that pits an anti-Syrian majority coalition government against the Shiite Hezbollah and Amal factions backed by a Christian group.
If Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s government falls, there may be calls for new parliamentary elections, reopening controversy over how to reform a Syrian-designed electoral law that most Lebanese leaders say should be scrapped.
The Taif agreement which ended the 1975-90 civil war modified the complex religious power-sharing system, set up at the birth of modern Lebanon in 1943. Taif gave Muslims and Christians equal representation in parliament instead of the 6 to 5 advantage Christians had enjoyed previously.
It stipulated that the president should remain a Maronite, the prime minister a Sunni and the parliament speaker a Shiite, while calling for the eventual abolition of the system that distributes state posts among Lebanon’s 17 recognised sects.
Al Duweihi’s figures show the number of Leb-anese entitled to passports, not the number actually residing in the country.
23 November 2006, 11:27 pmJon Flanders:
http://www.gulfnews.com/region/Lebanon/10082387.html
Cut off the url at the end, sorry about that.
Jon Flanders
23 November 2006, 11:29 pmJames:
ProudNeoCon:
Responding to your points:
1. The article does not say Lebanon was a part of Syria. ‘Enclave’ has multiple meanings.
2. The the Palestinians went to Jordan after being pushed out of Palestine by the Israelis.
24 November 2006, 12:36 amxenia:
It is distressing that there are so many idiots commenting on this topic here. Acting as experts simply on the basis of being born! You’d think they are all fluent in Arabic (reminds me of a guy who gave a lecture at a university on how terribly biased al-Jazeera was, based on watching it a few times in a bar in NYC with Arabic-speaking friends who translated bits for him. He did not know any Arabic, but he said “he was willing to learn”). But who needs to make efforts to learn, when the initial position is that of superiority?
Ready to defend any comprador’s golden swimming-pools, while begrudging sheer existence to so many of us…
Most terrible is the arrogance dripping from every word, the unspoken assertion that all of those who are not US-Americans or their allies are only semi-human (or perhaps even quarter-human, since blacks and Latinos can achieve semblance of “humanness” through celebrating all-American rituals and dying in their resource wars).
But again, I wonder why discussions of gender are more fruitful on this blog than those of world politics. Are they perceived as more concrete, more immediately relevant?
24 November 2006, 6:33 amxenia:
PS with discussions of gender I mean that both in quality and quantity, the discussions by the readers of this blog
24 November 2006, 6:37 amare more abundant than those that touch upon non-gender topics, when really both of them are entwined…
Marilyn Farhat:
So, true, Xenia,
Gender is part of most things in life, including politics. Unfortunately, women are not listened to in matters of history, politics, or war, even if they are good experts in their field. Somehow, war and politics are men’s domains outwardly.
To make matters worse, non-Western women’s position in society is used as a strategy by Western politicians to prove the inadequacy of the terrorists. Afghanistan and Iraq are horrible places because their women are abused. But let one of these same women break the mold and speak out about the war or non-female specific issues and, all of a sudden, the men are dumbfounded.
Eastern women are valuable in all societies as long as they act like helpless puppies. They are the “cause celebre” of the shallow left in this country. The topics of gender violence and rape are theirs. They are interviewed extensively in the media and are encouraged to write books about their experiences within their terrorist oppressive societies. But, have those same women enter political and war matters and discuss the same issues that men talk about amongst themselves, they are completely ignored or ridiculed.
That is why I am a firm believer that we as women have to fight, yes fight, for our own rights, especially women who underwent physical and political oppression because of their political (not just gender specific) views. There are so many women out there from the Middle East who are experts in their fields, but they are rarely encouraged to participate in those discussions. When you read articles or watch programs about the Middle East next time, pay attention to who is doing all the talking. You will rarely see a woman from the Middle East, unless she is there to confirm the racist view of Arabs as terrorists as she recounts the horrors of her oppression under Saddam or some other tyrant.
There are many women who fought alongside the men and who sacrificed tremendously to help the oppressed during wartime. They were alongside the men picking up the bodies and coming up with solutions to critical problems that involved life and death. When the war was over and the crisis subsided, these same women went back to being second class citizens and the men continued to speak on their behalf and prevent them from pursuing political ambitions under the guise of being “protective.” In the West it is under the guise that women are “incapable” or “helpless” or “hormonal.”
That is why I believe that we women have to struggle to free our children from the bondage of war and we have to be strong to stand up for what we believe in when the real test comes. It is not easy in “real” life.
24 November 2006, 4:05 pmGary Goodman:
Regarding to Ansel’s point to Michael Schmidt post on Hezbollah here
http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=3651&search_text=hezbollah
I see that the original author Michael Karadjis makes some clarifications here:
http://greenleftbloggers.blogspot.com/2006/09/reply-to-anarchist-on-hezbollah.html
I’m far from expert, but I think the 2nd clarification is more accurate and well-balanced.
Karadjis makes some clear distinctions of which I was not aware between Iranian Hizbollah, as a socially repressive gang of thugs, and Lebanese Hizbollah, a distinctly separate and distinct organization committed to libertation against imperialist US-Israeli attacks and semi-occupation.
Having said that, I am aware of conflicting *ideals*:
individual liberation, where any individual is not repressed by a majority or minority, whether it be a govt or a party, the sort of libertarian perspective
…
however, when taken to it’s logical conclusions, this would tend to produce de facto oligarchy and most likely the rise of a State under some pretext — security? — which is founded to secure the rights and property of the oligarchs.
…
in other words, it seems there is always some sort of potential power vacuum which will inevitably be filled by some sort of “tyranny”, a tyranny of enforcing some measure of egalitarianism (and repressing those who resist egalitarian movements), or a tyranny of enforcing oligarchic interests of some type (including religious oligarchy).
…
I notice that insofar as gender, there is a lot of truth that women seem to have MORE representation in power in today’s horrible Neo-con America than women tend to have in Islamic regimes, but of course it is ONLY (or primarily) women who promote the oligarchy (like Rice) who get such representation.
I’m sorry if this is confusing. A lot of it seems like walking through a house of mirrors esp in defining labels and contexts, yet maybe this confusion is the very thing crying for clarification.
Esp in America, I do not think anything is ‘ripe’ for any kind of revolution considering the quantity of apolitical TV-saturated racist numbskulls, and I mean just generic moderates and their attitudes. Also considering many educated politically-oriented leftie people who have just browsed the smorgasbord and put the best looking junk food on their plate.
I think I see confusion, chaos, and mass graves in the US future, as most people have no idea who is their ally and who is their oppressor, or still think the Capitalistic State is their savior and anyone in oppostion to viewpoints of Bill O’Reilly — or Nancy Pelosi — or Noam Chomsky — should be severely punished. (I really think I would enjoy putting a bullet btw the eyes of smug Glenn Beck, but .. ahhh.. he’s very “talented” ..)
25 November 2006, 3:44 pmProudNeoCon:
To James:
“The the Palestinians went to Jordan after being pushed out of Palestine by the Israelis.”
You are correct that first refugies arrived after 1948 and more followed in 1967 but it is not until arrival of PLO in 1970 the military force of Palestinians have effected the balance of power in Lebanon
I point you out to the lecture by Simon Haddad
(Lecturer in the Political Studies and Public Administration Department at the American University of Beirut). He has a very in depth analysis of Palestinian issues in Lebanon
http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/PRRN/papers/haddad.html
I will quote him:
“In September 1970, the Jordanian government launched an attack known as the Black September against refugee camps in response to Palestinian military activities in Jordan. The result was the relocation of the PLO power base to Lebanon.
The PLO’s strong political and military presence in Lebanon during the 1970’s often referred to as “Palestinian state within a state” came at the expense of large segments of the Lebanese population”
26 November 2006, 1:09 amProudNeoCon:
To Joh Flanders:
“It’s not that the Maronites are inherently evil, the problem in Lebanon, going back much further than 1975 even, is that the Maronites, as a minority of the population, have run the country way past their expiration date. Their continued undemocratic hold on power is untenable and can’t continue without the active support of the US and Israel.”
1) Maronites has not been in power in Lebanon since the civil war. Therefore there were no ” continued undemocratic hold on power”. In order to have a power in Lebanon one needs to create an allience out of Shiites, Sunnies, Druze and varius Christian fractions…
2) The strongest supporter of Maronites has always been France. For Israel it was common goal of defeating PLO which put two sides together.
3) I find it very cinical to bring Democracy into discussing of Middle East. In the entire region there are 2 countries which have free elections: Israel and Lebanon. And one country which has semi-free elcections: Iran (since unellected body can dismiss any candidate). So let not start with it…
26 November 2006, 1:20 amProudNeoCon:
To Marilyn Farhat.
1 Syria and Lebanon were seperate Crusaders kindoms before Ottoman empire. Before crusaders they were seperate entities as well. If you go way back it used to be a Phonenicia in BC. It was not until Ottoman rule that “Syria” or “Greater Syria” began to include Lebanon and land chich we now know as Jordan and Israel (those coutnries did not exist then). The point of this is that outside of Beqaa Lebanon has a seperate history and tradition from Syria.
2- agree
3- agree
4- I am not going to argue with you Israeli-Arab conflict. We will never agree. I am very pro-Israeli (and very aware of the biases that introduces) and based on your post you are muslim from Lebanon (given your story about your uncle) who does not like Israel. I think both of us can agree on the fact that large numbers of Muslim Arabs from Israel and West Bank became refugies and part of them went to Lebanon. (We can argue whose fault it is forever)
5- I agree with the facts (if not the reasons for them)
6- Agree. To me the fact that Palestinians (I did not know that it was only Muslim Palestinians in Lebanon) did not get any legal rights in most of the Arab nations is a shamefull secret of Arab world (at least it is secret here in US).
7,8,9 - The civil war is always ugly. I think you let your background cloud your view in placing larger portion of the blame on Christian militia. When I showed yout post to my Christian Lebaniese friend, his only comment was :”In the civil war the other side is always more evil”. Having study the Russian and Spanish civil war in detail (I am just a novice in history of Lebanon) I cna say that there is always enought guilt to go around. As for support of other parties for different side - what do you expect. All sides: Syria, French, US, Israel had their interests to protect…
10- I agree that Christians were ones who invited Syria to come in in the first place, but for the last 25 years it was Muslims who were making sure it stays in Lebanon.
YOu are talking about Christian militia fighting each other, but the same is true for Muslim militias as well. Basicly in Lebanon everyone were allies at one time and every one were enemies at another.
I would like to say that all my friends who were part of Ceder revolution would disagree with you on how “ever-inflated” it was. It did what nobody could do before: forced Syria to leave. It also for first time in 25 years created goverement which attempts to create an independed policy. That is hard given that there is a seperate army (Hezbollah) which is not under goverment control. One would argue tht Hezbollah’s goals are not always the same as the goals of Lebanon…
Finally I would like to adress your description of Hezbollah:
“There is vast popular Lebanese and non-Lebanese support for Hezbollah across the globe and THAT is the reason the United States and Israel are trying to get rid of it.”
It is true that Hezbollah is very popular in Arab world. However, it is not a reason US and Israel is against it. They are against it because Hezbollah likes to blow things and people up.
“Most Hezbollah’s targets have been inside Lebanon against foreign invaders. They do not carry out operations outside their zones of occupation and, even in this last war with Israel, the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped inside contested territory (Sheb’a Farms).”
Here your facts are wrong. Two Israili soldiers were kidnaped near Aitaa al-Chaab (closest Lebaneese town) in Israeli terretory. It is not in Sheb’a Farms. Even Hezbollah did not claim that kidnapping had anything to do with Sheb’a Farms. Hezbollah had fired rockets numerous times before that kidnapping at Israel, not at any “occupied” land..
26 November 2006, 2:15 amBrandon:
Marilyn,
Thank you, you summarize a lot of very complex history very succinctly, and make a lot of excellent points (in both posts). Can you refer me to any good reading on the Saudi role in the Civil War (in English or Arabic).
26 November 2006, 4:49 amMarilyn Farhat:
Brandon,
I am posting this link to a paper entitled THE LEBANESE CIVIL WAR AND THE TAIF AGREEMENT, http://almashriq.hiof.no/ddc/projects/pspa/conflict-resolution.html
published at the American University of Beirut. I think it is a good place to start. It is difficult to find Arabic sources and on my last visit to Beirut, it was disappointing how few the bookstores were. I had trouble getting a few Arabic books I wanted.
But I do have a book currently on order which may shed some light on the Saudi (as well as other) role in the conflict. Their most famous more recent role is their sponosoring the Ta’if Agreement which supposedly put an end to the Civil War and which put in writing the confessional allocations to the different offices in Lebanon, including the office of the President, PM, and Speaker of Parliament.
I have such a ravenous appetite for reading anything written about Lebanon. I lived through most of the events but there are many holes in my memory. It usually takes years and decades for thorough studies to come out about conflicts such as long civil wars. But, please, if you can order the DVD series I mentioned in a post above, HARB LUBNAN
26 November 2006, 5:29 pmMarilyn Farhat:
Sorry, cut off here,
it would help understand the events more. It is in Arabic by you have English subtitles.
26 November 2006, 5:30 pmMarilyn Farhat:
Mr. NeoCon,
This is the last time I am going to engage in this topic. If you claim you are a novice in Lebanese politics, why are you arguing with me about the information I provided? You are an adult and you can do your own research. The reality in Lebanon was that everyone in power was corrupt and Lebanon had always been under colonial rule from before the time of the Crusades. The population itself was corrupt because people who are subjugated for centuries tend to develop immoral ways of dealing with politics so they can survive. The Middle East is the hotbed of political and historical corruption.
What was sad in this whole mess is the plight of the poor of both the Palestinians and the Lebanese. And you being a supporter of Israel as you claim does put an end to any discussion. I support all oppressed people and no one else. The Israelis have an illegally seized country, the Palestinians have nothing.
As far as your comments about me and my uncle, true, I was raised a Sh’ite Muslim, but there are interfaith marriages in my family, which is not that uncommon in Lebanon. However, I really don’t believe in all the religious hogwash that the Jews, Christians, or Muslims believe in. I forfeited that years ago after the sights, smells, and sounds of war became ingrained in me, all in the name of religion or god. My uncle was a senior citizen who was pulled out of his bed 2 a.m. and placed in a Syrian/Phalangist truck under the suspicion that he was a communist, which he was not and, even if he were, was that a crime? He never carried a weapon in his life and he never fought. He was a sick old man who, as a teenager, had visited the USSR, a fact well-known to his Armenian neighbor who had a personal grievance with him and who “reported†him to the Syrians and the Phalangists. THAT is the kind of blasphemy that was perpetrated on the civilians of Lebanon. Many people were killed because of “collaborators†just as we are seeing in Iraq, because of personal grudges. I would like you to ask your “friends†if they ever tortured anybody and, if they did, what was the justification?
I would ask the question here, why would any decent human being collaborate with Israel or any other group, Syrians included, knowing full well that neither had the welfare of the people in mind? Do you honestly think that Israel would have been better for Lebanon? Do you know what their plans are or were for that country? Beirut was the economic hub of the Middle East. Lebanon possesses a good water supply which Israel has been planning on laying claims to. They also wanted to eradicate it as a viable nation. There was much discussion of partitioning the country in the 70s.
This feudal political mentality still rules Lebanon. It is a system based on vengeance and assassination. It is part of the Jewish Zionist mentality also. The fruit does not fall far from the tree. The children of Abraham are fighting it out now all in the name of their evil god. I do not believe in good and evil, but I would make an exception here. We create god in our own gruesome image. The Abrahamic faith is notorious for its brutality, tribalism, infighting, coming out of top of the political and religious pyramid, patriarchy, oppression of women, warlike disposition, killing and sacrificing in the name of some male god, and my favorite, SACRIFICING its children so the followers of Abraham can “look good†in front of their god and the world. See, the Jewish and other Abrahamic traditions are all about appearances. Racism is also part of that tradition. The idea of Chosen People is so offensive to me. I am in awe sometimes at how people can accept such blatant racism while condemning others.
Hariri and the second Gemayyil have joined the ranks of the countless murdered in this obscene war and they will not be the last. There have been assassinations and bombs in Lebanon since before you were born. Both Israel and Syria have pummeled Lebanese neighborhoods, villages, and people for decades, this latest atrocity with the consent of this awesome democracy. Suddenly the Israeli apologists are out in droves concerned about Lebanon. Nobody gives a crap about the Lebanese people. It is all about Israel and its influence in the region and this obsession with Hezbollah. Well, when Hezbollah is gone, who will be the next bogey man?
The superiority, or inferiority complex, depending on which way you look at it, which a group in the Maronite community has held has contributed to the Lebanese problem and carnage. Their grab for power and their refusal to share while many of their countrymen were starving, while at the same time collaborating with the state south of the border, a state which was killing them on a daily basis, does not really do well for the image of the fascist militias.
Hezbollah, whatever their shortcomings, have done a lot to improve the lives of poor people. Most Lebanese did not like them when they first emerged, but their image did change when the Lebanese realized they were willing to sacrifice to free their country without asking for anything in return. Since 1985 and to this day, they are there for the poor people, regardless of religion.
There are many expatriate Lebanese Forces and other allied militias who take out their resentments on the web. They are no more than racists who are wrapped in the flag of nationalism. They abhor anything Muslim or Arab and, as a result, they prostitute themselves to every single invader that sets foot in Lebanon. They did it with the Syrians and they did it with the Israelis and they are doing it again with Israel and the United States. All in the hope of proving to themselves and to the rest of the world that they are not Arab. How much contempt they must have for themselves and who they are!
Time to live and let live. Other Lebanese love their country just as much as any Maronite does. They, too, have sacrificed for it. Ja’ja’ and Hobeika and their likes are a bunch of murderers, along with their counterparts in other militias, including the Murabitoun, the Socialists, and all the one hundred other groups roaming the country from all denominations. All of them tried to make excuses for the atrocities they committed, just like Israel tried to blame Hezbollah for the hundreds of civilians incinerated and dismembered in their bombardment of Lebanon. How obscene can a human being get?
Maybe those same friends of yours should go back to Lebanon and help all the poor children still living under the rain and in the mud and tents because their schools and homes were bombed out by the Israelis. Maybe your friends can call up PM Saniora and ask him to release all the internationally donated funds so that schools can be built for those children who have not attended a day of school yet because they have nowhere to go. Talk about why people in Lebanon do not trust anyone? Hezbollah is not the problem, neither was the PLO. Both are an outcome of the control of those who are rich and in power over everyone else. Lebanon was in trouble long before the first Hezbollah bomber set himself off.
We cannot always blame the oppressed for their plight for there will come a time when they will jump up and bite your head off.
26 November 2006, 6:41 pmBrandon:
Thanks Marilyn,
I have seen the documentary series, but it has been a while. I think I’ll order, adn watch it again.
the online source looks good, I’m looking forward to checking it out.
I work on Gulf issues. Right now I am mainly working on the relationship between the Nixon Doctrine policy of selling weapons to Gulf states, and the subsequent 1973 oil price increase. essentially the oil crisis as a means of financing an arms deal. But I would like to eventually connect this story to the story of ever escalating violence throughout the ME.
26 November 2006, 11:06 pmThe Lebanese Civil War, Gulf War I (1980-88) and II (1991), the Afghan Jihad are obvious places to start, but there is of course Eastern and Southern Africa as well.
I’m hoping to find more Arabic sources, but as you indicate perpetual warfare is bad for publishing and record keeping.
Brandon:
Might be worth re-posting Stan’s comments on where exactly the capture of the Israeli soldiers took place:
“The border of Southern Lebanon and Israel is a seamless web of intervisible Israeli outposts with night vision devices, tied together with ground surveillance radar, plowed-flat and raked daily to see footprints, and backed by quick reaction forces. Israelis routinely make incursive patrols into Lebanon. It is nearly impossible for an organized group of Hezbolla or anyone else to cross the border south, much less capture prisoners there. The very notion that this was an incursion INTO Israel is propped up solely by the credulity of the general public that knows nothing about military operations. In reality, the idea is as ludicrous as the Easter Bunny.”
Comment by Stan — 7/18/2006 @ 9:51 am
26 November 2006, 11:41 pmProudNeoCon:
Stan,
Why my last reply to Marilyn was removed? It contained no personal attacks nor it was off topic. If this blog for “liberals only” please let me know.
NOTE: It was removed because it was engaging in blatant generalizations that amount to islamophobia. The rules are clear. That will not be tolerated.
27 November 2006, 10:46 amProudNeoCon:
To Brandon and Stan:
“The border of Southern Lebanon and Israel is a seamless web of intervisible Israeli outposts with night vision devices, tied together with ground surveillance radar, plowed-flat and raked daily to see footprints, and backed by quick reaction forces. Israelis routinely make incursive patrols into Lebanon. It is nearly impossible for an organized group of Hezbolla or anyone else to cross the border south, much less capture prisoners there.”
That is incorrect and you know it. Hezbollah had crossed the border at least 6 times in the last 3 years attempting to kidnap Israeli soldiers. Those attempts were widely reported in Israeli media. Hezbollah did not attempt to sneek into Israel but has attacked the patrol in force while staging a rocket attacks in 2 other sectors as a diversion.
27 November 2006, 10:53 amProudNeoCon:
Stan:
“It was removed because it was engaging in blatant generalizations that amount to islamophobia. The rules are clear. That will not be tolerated.”
This statement is a blatant lie. There was not a single critisism of Islam in the post. The entire post consisted of
1) The history of American-Lebanese family (who are my friends) who lost 17 members during Lebanese civil war. The history was the answer to another post (which you allowed) accusing them of war crimes
based on the sole known fact that they are anti-Syrian
2) Description of basic laws of Jewish faith
3) Comparing human rigths in Israel vs. Arab countries
4) Critisism of Hezbollah.
You claim that you want the debate yet you purge any posts you do not agree with. If you are trully convinced of your ideas you would not be afraid to have them challenged. On another hand, why am I suprised that “enlightened minds of the left” do not want to engage in the discussions.. LOL…
MODERATOR’S NOTE: There is a balance that this blog attempts to strike, but it is not a balance between right and left. Nor is this a liberal blog. One of the moderators is an avowed socialist, and the other with her political roots in the radical feminsm that waged and stills wages an unabashed and fearlessly deep critique of liberal feminism as well as leftist patriarchy. Anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism, anti-racism, and anti-patriarchy underwrite this entire modest project. We exercise a very circumscribed tolerance for people who want to learn about what we are saying, have something to contribute to forging the rapproachement between feminism and socialism as movements, and who share our opposition to the imperial depradations of today’s world system, as well a sthe vision of an alternative that is ecologically sustainable. We are not, nor do we intend to be, a space for invasion by trolls, internet bullies, or reactionaries to have their little platforms any fuken place they like.
27 November 2006, 2:02 pmYou most certainly did hit the replay switch on the whole clash of civilization pitch, and I’ll hit the replay switch on this: it will not happen here. You already have multi-zillion dollar think-tanks promoting your point of view, from which we are systematicaly excluded. Allowing a free-for-all risks alienating the people who are serious about the discussion pertaining to the issues that preoccupy the moderators. It’s a blog, not a public park. As far as challneging ideas, I have had two public debates in packed college auditoriums with prominent neocons, and I was embarrassed for my opponents by the transparent insupportability of their positions… both times involving this same clash of civilizaitons trope. I am now caring for na infant all day, and working at night, and I am disinclined to make time to rehash the shameful history of Zionism every time someon like you pops up. You had your say at huffingtonpost, where there remain an abundance of clueless Zionists, who like you conflate Judaism and Zionism (an expansionist secular political movement that turned its back on the holocaust when it was in progress, consorted with fascists, and continues to rip off other peoples’ land under the pretext of security) any time it suits their demagogic purposes.
Stan:
Playing with death in Lebanon
By Mark LeVine
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HK28Ak03.html
In the wake of the latest political assassination to rock Lebanon - last week’s shooting of Pierre Gemayel, a scion of one of the foremost Christian Maronite political families - suspicion fell on the Syrians, and perhaps Hezbollah, as the most likely culprits.
There is some logic to this view, given Syria’s likely involvement in the assassination in February 2005 of former prime minister Rafik Hariri. Gemayal’s is the fifth assassination since Hariri’s; most every victim was critical of the Syrians, and to a lesser extent Hezbollah.
But even if we grant that Syria was behind Hariri’s assassination, and there is very good evidence to support this assessment, it is hard to see what Syria or Hezbollah gains from Gemayel’s killing. Syria is in a stronger regional position than it has been in years. The administration of US President George W Bush has been forced to eat crow and contemplate negotiations with Damascus to gain its help in easing the insurgency in Iraq. Syria’s main sponsor, Iran, is similarly in its strongest geostrategic position in decades, and its ally Hezbollah emerged as the political winner of this summer’s war with Israel.
So why would Syria risk upsetting this favorable balance by killing a Maronite politician when Hezbollah had already bolted the government and was threatening massive demonstrations to bring down the post-Cedar Revolution political arrangement in favor of one that would better reflect its - and thus Syria’s - increasing power? The same question can be asked of those who would link Hezbollah to the Gemayel assassination, which sapped the energy out of its latest political machinations.
Of course, even if neither Syria nor Hezbollah had much to gain from Gemayel’s assassination, it’s not hard to imagine Bashar al-Assad or Hassan Nasrallah miscalculating the impact of such an act, as the Syrian president might well have done if he in fact ordered Hariri’s assassination, and the Hezbollah leadership admitted doing when they kidnapped two Israeli soldiers this past July on the assumption that Israel’s response would be in keeping with the rules of the game then in place.
But before we look to who might have miscalculated in ordering the hit on Gemayel it’s worth asking who actually benefits from his assassination. And from this perspective the one party that clearly benefits from Gemayel’s murder is the Israeli government.
Israel was the main loser in the summer war, at least politically and strategically. The country’s leaders began threatening a new round of fighting even before they began pulling troops out of the south of Lebanon. Hezbollah’s postwar ascendence was the most visible and troubling sign of Israel’s seemingly unprecedented military weakness and strategic blundering.
Pulling off an assassination like this, which is by no means beyond Israel’s ability, would serve several goals. First, it would turn the chaos that Hezbollah was trying to create in the Lebanese political system against it. Instead of Hezbollah managing the postwar chaos to strengthen its position, the movement is now forced on to the defensive and must react to a new dynamic in which Christians (with the exception of the breakaway Michel Aoun faction) and Sunnis are more united than ever in their desire to block Hezbollah’s takeover of the system.
Second, if Lebanon descends into civil war, which is a frightening if still distant possibility, Hezbollah would in effect be neutralized, and Israel could rely on Maronites and perhaps Sunnis to attack Hezbollah without Israel facing the international condemnation it received during the war.
Third, suspicion against Syria - and Druze leader Walid Jumblatt has publicly accused Damascus of being behind the assassination - has already stopped the momentum towards normalization with the Assad regime by Europe and the United States in order to bring it on board in Iraq. As important, if the crisis deepens, it will foreclose the possibility that the Bush administration (now under the tutelage of the only American diplomat to stand up to Israel since Dwight Eisenhower, James Baker) would force Israel to negotiate a deal for the Golan Heights in the near future.
It is true that the Gemayel family and Maronite community more broadly was once aligned to Israel; but that was a generation ago. The Maronites proved unable to maintain power in Lebanon or serve Israel’s interests. Pierre Gemayel’s uncle, Bachir, was assassinated days before he was to assume the country’s presidency in 1982, and his father, Amine, was unable to cement a peace treaty with Israel because of Syrian pressure. The unofficial alliance was abandoned once it was clear that Israel’s days in Lebanon were numbered.
Participating, or otherwise benefiting from the killing of an old ally at a moment when the blame would be placed on one’s enemies may seem far-fetched, but at least as far back as the great Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu “to mystify, mislead and surprise the enemy” has been one of the most well-regarded axioms of warfare. The death of Pierre Gemayel could well push Lebanon to the brink of civil war and lead to further alienation of Syria and Hezbollah from the international community. This might well be the unintended consequence of actions taken by either party; but if the question is to be asked “Who benefits from Pierre Gemayel’s assassination?”, it is hard not to include the Israeli government among the parties which have the most to gain from the scenario now unfolding in Beirut.
Mark LeVine, PhD, is a professor in the department of history, University of California-Irvine.
28 November 2006, 11:13 amMarilyn Farhat:
Brandon and Everyone,
I am providing a link to an interview from the media organization “Electronic Intifada†with Samah Idriss of CAMPAIGN TO BOYCOTT SUPPORTERS OF ISRAEL. It should give information about some of the topics discussed here, and about Henry Kissinger’s relationship to the war in Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East. http://electronicintifada.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/11/4155
If you remember, Richard Nixon did pay a visit to Syria and Lebanon in 1974, less than one year before the Civil War started. At the beginning of the war, there was widespread fear that Kissinger’s doctrine of “Balkanization†of Lebanon was the main political impetus that provided the fuel for the war. There were fears in all camps that Lebanon would be divided into 4 “cantons†along confessional lines, with the Palestinians controlling the southern portion (which would give them a permanent homeland in place of their original one in Palestine), Syria controlling the eastern portion, the Christian militias controlling the mountain regions, and Beirut would be an “open†city. There was even talk of population transfers within and across borders to accommodate such a division. That doctrine was resisted by most Lebanese from all denominations, except the most fanatical. It was and is aimed at making Israel the only strong nation in the Middle East. This supports all the attempts at the destabilization of Lebanon, Iraq, the Occupied Territories, Afghanistan, and Iran.
This doctrine has, of course, been introduced into the Iraq conflict. But it is a doctrine that is also part of the Neo Con agenda, to divide up the Middle East into little areas of “stable†mini nations along religious or ethnic lines, for the purpose of American and Israeli hegemony.
I think with all the obsession with Hezbollah, many have forgotten the real motives behind most of the wars in the Middle East right now.
Kissinger is possibly the most despised American politician in Lebanon (in the eyes of my generation at least). He is a self-absorbed ideologue who uses people and nations to achieve strategic ends without any concern for the populations. He is the one who made the famous statement: “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.â€.
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/4/5878
It is also through the efforts of Kissinger that Syria was able to intervene in Lebanon in 1976.
I am also sending a link to a publishing company in Lebanon with books in Arabic and English.
30 November 2006, 8:51 pmhttp://www.almaktabah.com/BrowseSubjects.asp
Marilyn Farhat:
This is the kind of racist rhetoric that the women of the Middle East are being used for by the Zionists and their supporters in this country.
Watch, listen and judge for yourselves what fascism in Lebanon is like.
How obscene can this get, using war traumatized women to promote Zionist policy!
Brigitte Gabriel, the new poster darling of Middle Eastern Imperialism.
Click from one frame to the next to watch it all. I have listened to this woman before and she was one of those on my mind when I talked about using women to further oppressive policies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8fa9yKQeTY&NR
30 November 2006, 9:19 pmMarilyn Farhat:
Brandon,
I am sending a link to a publishing company in Lebanon with books in Arabic and English. http://www.almaktabah.com/BrowseSubjects.asp
If this gets through, please be aware that I have been trying to send more information about Kissinger and Lebanon but it is not making it onto the blog. I do not think it is getting through to the moderators. I do not know how these blogs work and I am not aware that what I have been sending was being blocked by the moderators .
If you need more info, Stan has my permission to give you my email address.
2 December 2006, 1:42 amMarilyn Farhat:
Stan,
Please be aware that this last post to Brandon that I have been trying to send has been reduced by me in an attempt to check where the problem with receiving it was.
I deleted a lot of info about Israel, Samah Idriss, Electronic Intifada, Henry Kissinger, boycotting Israel and a few accompanying links. This last version is the only one that went through.
2 December 2006, 1:51 amDeAnander:
Marilyn (and maybe others) — I have witnessed myself today a case where the WP s’ware appeared to accept a comment of mine, but the comment never appeared in the moderation queue. However an attempt to resubmit it resulted in a “duplicate comment” error. This is at present an unsolved mystery. But Stan was able to see the same behaviour using the same text. For now I believe that certain (tbd) patterns of text in some way poison the WP s’ware, i.e. there is a bug (or more than one) that bites only occasionally. Don’t have enough cases to make any generalisations yet. Anyway, if a post does not appear within, say, 12 hours, I suggest a (short) followup inquiry post, as in “I posted 3 pages of very interesting facts about earthworms yesterday, what happened?”
2 December 2006, 4:15 amMarilyn Farhat:
Thanks De.
On the Lebanon front this week, there is a mass protest going on in Beirut (close to a million people according to Lebanese papers). The Lebanese Cabinet is under siege with requests from the “Opposition” and Hezbollah for the formation of a new “Unity Government.” The request of the Opposition Movement are new electoral laws that reflect the wishes of the majority of the Lebanese people. The request includes the office of the President which is strictly a Maronite position. The main road to the government offices is blockaded and the Saudis, the Americans, the French are all offering their “support” to the Saniora government.
This is a critical point right now. Many in Lebanon see no real solution without Syria and Iran, and there is anticipation of renewed sectarian conflict with many trying to prevent it. See the article from the Guardian.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/12/02/africa/ME_GEN_Lebanon_Sectarian_Fears.php
For those of you who can read Arabic http://www.assafir.com/iso/today/front/238.html
3 December 2006, 12:04 amComandante Gringo:
Nothing like a current crisis in the Nooze to bring out the vested interests. Just look at all the tripe posted above.
But most especially what is scurrilous ci-dessus is the scandalous analysis from the South Afrikan anarkist: who actually makes a case for collaborating with imperialism, simply because Suria and Hizbullah have their own histories and pathologies to answer for/deal with.
AFAIC more proof of the absolute poverty of anarkist theory, whatever the failings of communists in their praxis.
3 December 2006, 12:34 am