Print ArticleBoth Michel Sleiman and Michel Aoun, former generals in the Lebanese army, are the major custodians of the issues affecting the status of the secular Christians in Lebanon.
Michel Sleiman is now the President of the Republic and represents - whether we, secularists and anti-religious people, like it or not - the Maronite community in the power structure in Lebanon.
Michel Aoun is the head of one of the largest Christian political parties - the Free Patriotic Movement - which is no longer in the opposition since his party has veto-power ministers in the current government.
Neither of these two individuals has any excuses anymore for not promoting the interests of the secular Christians in Lebanon against the encroachments of the duplicitous Sunni establishment of the Hariri-Siniora tandem (which is secular on the surface, but staunchly behind the Salafists, fundamentalists and other pro al-Qaeda terrorist groups), and of the Shiite establishment represented by the equally hypocritical Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri and the openly radical Hassan Nasrallah of the Hezbollah terrorist organization which is now an ally of Aoun and a member of the government.
There are two basic tests to whether Aoun and Sleiman will survive the coming 2009 parliamentary elections. While Aoun is probably too old to have a significant political future, his party's future is at stake. Sleiman on the other hand has open political ambitions beyond the presidency as he is seeking to create a political base in his hometown of Amchit and the surrounding Byblos district.
The two tests are:
The Lebanese prisoners in Syria. Aoun has made many promises in the past but has appeared to renege on them lately. When the issue comes up, he defends Syria indirectly by diluting the issue (of the Lebanese kidnapped in Lebanon and jailed in Syria) with those missing in Lebanon as a result of the decades of strife in the 1970s and 1980s. That is one cheap and sleazy way for him to get back at Samir Geagea (who is behind many assassinations and kidnappings during the 1980s).
Sleiman mentioned the prisoners once - during his swearing-in speech - but then never brought the issue up again, even when he crawled to a "summit" with Assad in Damascus last month. Licking Assad's behind was a lot of work for him, so when the Syrians ordered him to shut up on the issue and keep licking, he obliged as the prime pro-Syrian lackey that he is.
The Lebanese refugees in Israel. These are close to 5,000 Lebanese citizens who fought Syria and Hezbollah throughout the 1980s and 1990s, but who were abandoned by both their government (from the 1970s) and the Israeli government in 2000 when Israel withdrew its troops from south Lebanon. The most prominent of those refugees is Etienne Sacre - Abu Arz - who is not in Israel but who lives in exile outside Lebanon and who is the President of the Guardians of the Cedars Party, the cleanest and most decent secular Christian party in Lebanon. The choice of these villagers was either to suffer retaliation from both Hezbollah and the pro-Syrian Hariri-Siniora government (for "dealing with the enemy"), or seek refuge in Israel. Most of them chose the latter and have been living in Israel ever since. Note that, even though Siniora and Hariri switched from being pro-Syrian before 2005 to anti-Syrian after 2005, the Siniora-Hariri stance vis-a-vis these anti-Syrian, anti-Hezbollah fighters and villagers, has remained the same: They are enemies because they dealt with the "enemy" Israel.
Turncoat Michel Aoun has a 2006 memorandum with Hezbollah stating that these people should return unharmed. Two years later, nothing has happened, and the very few who dared return were kidnapped, tortured and harassed by Hezbollah, then turned over to the Siniora government which promptly set up kangaroo courts that sentenced them to various punishments. One of them was a 9-year old girl in 2000 (who is now 17) who could not possibly have any idea about what "dealing with the enemy" meant. Many of them end up leaving the country as soon as they can. So Aoun has yet to deliver on this issue, particularly since he has amply covered for Hezbollah's terror rule but has so far gotten nothing in return.
Sleiman, on the other hand, has done nothing on this issue at all. His discourse continues to be that of a lackey to Hezbollah and Syria (he was promoted as Army Chief by the Syrian occupation in 1990), and he is therefore expected to behave as such on this issue.
Finally, the other "anti-Syrian" Christians in the Siniora-Hariri coalition are Samir Geagea (fundamentalist religious Christian) and Amin Gemayel (traditionalist Christian feudal lord). Neither of these two individuals have done anything on this issue, which is surprising since they are the allies (more like the affiliates, really) of Siniora-Hariri. You'd think that they can leverage their support to Siniora by demanding that he not mistreat the returnees from Israel who are Siniora's "anti-Syrian" allies in fact, but they have done nothing as they worry more about maintaining the little crumbs of power that the Hariri-Siniora tandem throws at them from its table.
These two issues will be the litmus test of the 2009 parliamentary elections, at least in the Christian camp. The secular Christians of Lebanon want these issues closed for both humanitarian and national dignity reasons. Both the religious Christians (of Geagea and Gemayel and the senile Maronite Patriarch Sfeir), and the secular Christians(of Aoun and Sleiman) seem impotent at delivering on these two issues to their base. The revenge of the electorate should not be a surprise to them in 2009, especially if Lebanese eimgrants and the Diaspora at large is allowed to vote. There are substantiated rumors that the Diaspora in the US, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere is rallying itself to field a large slate of independent candidates for Parliament in 2009; if this dream comes true, I know now who I will be voting for.
Michel Sleiman is now the President of the Republic and represents - whether we, secularists and anti-religious people, like it or not - the Maronite community in the power structure in Lebanon.
Michel Aoun is the head of one of the largest Christian political parties - the Free Patriotic Movement - which is no longer in the opposition since his party has veto-power ministers in the current government.
Neither of these two individuals has any excuses anymore for not promoting the interests of the secular Christians in Lebanon against the encroachments of the duplicitous Sunni establishment of the Hariri-Siniora tandem (which is secular on the surface, but staunchly behind the Salafists, fundamentalists and other pro al-Qaeda terrorist groups), and of the Shiite establishment represented by the equally hypocritical Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri and the openly radical Hassan Nasrallah of the Hezbollah terrorist organization which is now an ally of Aoun and a member of the government.
There are two basic tests to whether Aoun and Sleiman will survive the coming 2009 parliamentary elections. While Aoun is probably too old to have a significant political future, his party's future is at stake. Sleiman on the other hand has open political ambitions beyond the presidency as he is seeking to create a political base in his hometown of Amchit and the surrounding Byblos district.
The two tests are:
The Lebanese prisoners in Syria. Aoun has made many promises in the past but has appeared to renege on them lately. When the issue comes up, he defends Syria indirectly by diluting the issue (of the Lebanese kidnapped in Lebanon and jailed in Syria) with those missing in Lebanon as a result of the decades of strife in the 1970s and 1980s. That is one cheap and sleazy way for him to get back at Samir Geagea (who is behind many assassinations and kidnappings during the 1980s).
Sleiman mentioned the prisoners once - during his swearing-in speech - but then never brought the issue up again, even when he crawled to a "summit" with Assad in Damascus last month. Licking Assad's behind was a lot of work for him, so when the Syrians ordered him to shut up on the issue and keep licking, he obliged as the prime pro-Syrian lackey that he is.
The Lebanese refugees in Israel. These are close to 5,000 Lebanese citizens who fought Syria and Hezbollah throughout the 1980s and 1990s, but who were abandoned by both their government (from the 1970s) and the Israeli government in 2000 when Israel withdrew its troops from south Lebanon. The most prominent of those refugees is Etienne Sacre - Abu Arz - who is not in Israel but who lives in exile outside Lebanon and who is the President of the Guardians of the Cedars Party, the cleanest and most decent secular Christian party in Lebanon. The choice of these villagers was either to suffer retaliation from both Hezbollah and the pro-Syrian Hariri-Siniora government (for "dealing with the enemy"), or seek refuge in Israel. Most of them chose the latter and have been living in Israel ever since. Note that, even though Siniora and Hariri switched from being pro-Syrian before 2005 to anti-Syrian after 2005, the Siniora-Hariri stance vis-a-vis these anti-Syrian, anti-Hezbollah fighters and villagers, has remained the same: They are enemies because they dealt with the "enemy" Israel.
Turncoat Michel Aoun has a 2006 memorandum with Hezbollah stating that these people should return unharmed. Two years later, nothing has happened, and the very few who dared return were kidnapped, tortured and harassed by Hezbollah, then turned over to the Siniora government which promptly set up kangaroo courts that sentenced them to various punishments. One of them was a 9-year old girl in 2000 (who is now 17) who could not possibly have any idea about what "dealing with the enemy" meant. Many of them end up leaving the country as soon as they can. So Aoun has yet to deliver on this issue, particularly since he has amply covered for Hezbollah's terror rule but has so far gotten nothing in return.
Sleiman, on the other hand, has done nothing on this issue at all. His discourse continues to be that of a lackey to Hezbollah and Syria (he was promoted as Army Chief by the Syrian occupation in 1990), and he is therefore expected to behave as such on this issue.
Finally, the other "anti-Syrian" Christians in the Siniora-Hariri coalition are Samir Geagea (fundamentalist religious Christian) and Amin Gemayel (traditionalist Christian feudal lord). Neither of these two individuals have done anything on this issue, which is surprising since they are the allies (more like the affiliates, really) of Siniora-Hariri. You'd think that they can leverage their support to Siniora by demanding that he not mistreat the returnees from Israel who are Siniora's "anti-Syrian" allies in fact, but they have done nothing as they worry more about maintaining the little crumbs of power that the Hariri-Siniora tandem throws at them from its table.
These two issues will be the litmus test of the 2009 parliamentary elections, at least in the Christian camp. The secular Christians of Lebanon want these issues closed for both humanitarian and national dignity reasons. Both the religious Christians (of Geagea and Gemayel and the senile Maronite Patriarch Sfeir), and the secular Christians(of Aoun and Sleiman) seem impotent at delivering on these two issues to their base. The revenge of the electorate should not be a surprise to them in 2009, especially if Lebanese eimgrants and the Diaspora at large is allowed to vote. There are substantiated rumors that the Diaspora in the US, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere is rallying itself to field a large slate of independent candidates for Parliament in 2009; if this dream comes true, I know now who I will be voting for.
view author's RSS feed
