Link
"..... now, through Hizbullah, Aoun’s reconciliation with Syria is sealed: in December he made a triumphant visit to Damascus and met President Bashar al-Assad several times....
The gulf between the FPM and the 14 March alliance is all the deeper because the two have a different analysis of the regional situation following Syria’s withdrawal from Lebanon in 2005. Aoun and his supporters believe that defending national integrity no longer depends merely on opposing Syrian interference, but all foreign interference, including from the West and Saudi Arabia. Reflecting the aspirations of marginalised, middle-class Maronite Christians, the FPM opposes sectarianism and wants the country to move towards secularism, whereas it believes the 14 March alliance wants to perpetuate the traditional sectarian order.
But although Aoun’s supporters argue for secularism and state reform, it doesn’t stop them analysing events in sectarian terms. Rima, a young FPM activist living in Ashrafiyyeh, a Christian quarter of Beirut, says: “Syria and Iran are no longer the biggest threat to Lebanon. For years now the threat has come from a Sunni fundamentalism that is extremely hostile to Christians, a fundamentalist ideology funded by Saudi petrodollars. So we have to unite with the Shia but also with non-sectarian Sunni. I prefer Iran – a country with intellectuals, elections and some rights – to Saudi Arabia, where women aren’t even allowed to drive.”
.... What is new is the ideological shift at the heart of the Maronite Christian camp created by the alliance between Aoun and Hizbullah. For the first time, a mass Maronite movement has allied itself politically and strategically with an organisation that is Islamist, nationalist, anti-American, anti-Israeli and inside the Arab and Islamic sphere of influence. This represents a minor revolution among the Maronite public. For the Aounists have altered Lebanon’s political and sectarian landscape. They have created a situation where a national Maronite movement can explicitly support Hizbullah’s right to keep its weapons, in the context of the Lebanese-Israeli conflict: “Bearing arms is not an end in itself, but a noble and sacred means that is exercised by any group whose land is occupied, on the grounds of political resistance”.
The alliance has also brought communities together. In July and August 2006, during the Israeli war on Hizbullah, many Shia took refuge in the mountains of Christian areas, at the behest of the FPM. This popular dynamic grew with the opposition demonstrations and sit-ins in Beirut, led by Hizbullah and the FPM in December 2006 against the government of Fouad Siniora....
Will it be worth it?
What’s more, Aoun sees himself as the defender of eastern Christians, a position he reinforced with his visits to Iran and Syria in 2008. The FPM’s acceptance of the new electoral law creating “small constituencies” does give Christians better representation in parliament, but it also endorses the sectarian argument....
The June elections will be decisive for General Aoun. If the FPM simply maintains its seats (currently 19 out of 128), its alliance with Hizbullah will have been justified. But it will provoke a leadership crisis among the Christians. However, if the FPM and Hizbullah win the elections, Michel Aoun will face a different challenge: that of reconciling his new status as leader of Lebanon’s Christians with his reformist, secular policies."
No comments:
Post a Comment