The War of words: Where it will lead Lebanon? By Salim Nazzal

The War of words: Where it will lead Lebanon?

By Salim Nazzal

Al-Jazeerah, September 27, 2006

In the presence of around one million Lebanese, Nassrullah in his victory speech raised new challenges for Lebanese politics, where already there is a delicate balance. This undoubtedly is a concern of all of the political parties. Although he addressed the Arab nations and Muslims and "The oppressed on earth." Nassrullah eyes seemed more focused on the Lebanese domestic situation.

This recently has seen intense debates about the future role of the resistance, the arms of Hizbullah in light of the UN resolution 1701 and the role of the U.N. forces in the southern part of the country. Nassrullah emphasized that the existence of the resistance is insurance for the security of Lebanon, should Israel attack again. For that reason he insisted, no force will disarm Hizbullah, especially in the presence of a Lebanese government which in his perspective is not able to defend Lebanon or to reconstruct it. To calm the voices which think that Hizbullah arms are for the Shia only, he stated that the resistance is for all of the Lebanese people, Shia, Sunni, Druze and Christians. Despite the fact that the main part of his critique was addressed to those "who put the dagger in the back of the resistance" his speech was somewhat reconciliatory leaving the door open to reach a political compromise to the current crisis.

The solution in his view lies in forming a national unity government, because that alone would be able to save the country from the dangers that the future holds. Samir Gaga rejected the idea of the Lebanese national’s government. His speech was rather focused on “the unity of the country before the government of the national unity”. Gaga opposes widening the current government to include his adversary the (Lebanese free trend) which is the Christian ally to Hizbullah.

Surrounded by thousands of his supporters Samir Ja'aja'a the leader of the Lebanese forces reminded Nassrullah that before "Maroon Al Ras there was Ain Al Rumane". Pointing to Ain Al Rumane, a major battle field during the civil war, Ja'aja'a was telling Nassrullah that the Lebanese Christian forces who fought in the civil war were also a resistance. Ja'aja'a’s clear message to Nassrullah was that the concept of resistance does not only mean resisting Israel. This is a clear indication that the Lebanese political parties do not have a common view as to who the enemy of Lebanon is. The occasion of Gage’s speech carried many meanings. Gaga delivered his speech to commemorate the soldiers of the Lebanese forces that were killed in the civil war.

Ja'aja'a made it clear that his present resistance unlike that in the past is peaceful, but the occasion and the atmosphere and the presence of thousands of his supporters may carry more than just that meaning. Ja'aja'a accused Hizbullah of building a state inside the state, and unlike Nassrullah who views the arm of Hizbullah as an insurance policy to protect Lebanon, Gage’s view is that only the treaty of 1949 signed after the first Palestine war is insurance for Lebanon. As Charles Ayoub the chief editor of Al Diyar paper points out the contribution of the Maronite church in holding the service for the killed soldiers of the Lebanese forces may put the position of cardinal Sfeir under critique. Historically speaking Bkerki (the residence of the Maronites cardinal) insists that it is the church for all Lebanon, and all Lebanese regardless of their faith, providing religious service for the killed soldiers of the Lebanese forces may weaken this claim.

Another speech was delivered by the Druze leader Jumblat in the presence of thousands of his supporters. Jumblat was harsh in his critique of Nassrullah: he accused him and his party of adopting totalitarian thinking. Jumblat's critical position towards the Hizbullah alliance with Syria and Iran is not new, yet what is new in his political stance is that he linked any future dialogue with Hizbullah, to Hizbullah cutting its ties with Syria and Iran. Jumblat knows very well that he can not expect Hizbullah to cut its ties with its region allies. Jumblat's new position will only contribute complications to the already complicated situation.

Despite the efforts of the speaker of the parliament Nabih Berry to reduce the tensions among the Lebanese political parties it is clear that the skies of Lebanon are cloudy, which some compare with the atmosphere of 1975 when the civil war erupted. Add the destruction of the Lebanese economy by the Israeli war on Lebanon and the skies over Lebanon seem even darker. For the time being the question of civil war is excluded by all parties, yet all parties recognize that Lebanon is moving towards more political instability. The situation needs serious treatment that many observers doubt the Lebanese politicians have the capability to give without external help.

Dr. Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian historian. He has written extensively on social and political issues in the middle East.

E mail: gibran44@hotmail.com

Earth, a planet hungry for peace

Apartheid Wall


The Israeli Land-Grab Apartheid Wall built inside the Palestinian territories, here separating Abu Dis from occupied East Jerusalem. (IPC, 7/4/04).

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank, like a Python. (Alquds,10/25/03).

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah's.

editor@aljazeerah.info