A Crucial Time for Saving Lebanon’s Fragile Democracy
EVERYWHERE I traveled throughout the Middle East this winter, the feeling was inescapable that the region could explode at any time. The threat of three simultaneous civil wars that King Abdullah of Jordan spoke of is real, and perhaps the most imminent danger - in Lebanon - is the least understood.
Lost in the shadows of Iraq, the struggle to save the fragile democracy born of the Cedar Revolution has reached a moment of truth. If America does not act now, this key front in the broader struggle between moderates and extremists for the future of the Arab world will be lost - and the consequences will long be felt throughout the region. The radicals’ ambitions for overthrow move from Prime Minister Fouad Siniora in Lebanon to President Mahmound Abbas in Ramallah to Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki in Iraq. They are determined to achieve a clean sweep.
Anyone who has longed for a George Washington or Thomas Jefferson to emerge and lead the fight for democracy in the Middle East should come to Beirut and meet the patriots who have made incredible sacrifices for a free and independent Lebanon.
There is the son of slain former prime minister Rafik Hariri. There is the Cabinet minister whose husband was assassinated soon after becoming president, and the minister of defense, who after 12 surgeries still bears the scars of an assassination attempt. There is the mother of recently slain 34-year-old Lebanese parliamentarian Pierre Gemayel, who said to me simply: “We pay a high price for sharing what you believe in,” and ask yourself whether we are paying her the debt owed for our shared beliefs.
At the forefront of this struggle is Siniora, the prime minister of Lebanon, who has stood up to a challenge that many extremists thought would bring down his government. Weakened by this summer’s war, Siniora is effectively under siege by Hezbollah, which has brought hundreds of thousands of demonstrators to the streets of Bierut and shut down the government with the mass resignation of its ministers.
To provide the support he needs, we must recognize and adapt to the new realities on the ground. We’ve lost 3,000 American lives and invested more than $300 billion in hopes of forcibly birthing democracy in Iraq - while largely ignoring Lebanon, where democratic institutions already have a foothold. Success there - and across the Middle East—ultimately depends more on winning over civilian populations with basic goods and services than defeating armies with sophisticated weapons and technology. New York’s street-wise mayor Fiorello LaGuardia proclaimed, “There is no Republican way to clean a street.” This is Politics 101: If you don’t deliver services, you don’t get the support of the people.
Yet today, the forces of radicalism are doing a far better job than the moderates in making the most basic connections with restive populations. In Lebanon, Iran has seized the opportunity to win over the population by channeling some $500 million in reconstruction funds through Hezbollah—over twice as much as we have. In fact, Iran is doing more in rebuilding Lebanon than Washington is doing in rebuilding New Orleans.
We must change this dynamic by dramatically increasing economic assistance - and pressing others in the international community to do the same - and ensuring that Lebanese see that they can count on their elected leaders. And we must redouble our efforts to strengthen the Lebanese military, which has earned the trust of the people but lacks the strength to confront Hezbollah.
The key to Lebanon’s future lies in getting Syria to truly respect Lebanese sovereignty. The money and weapons that empower Hezbollah come primarily through Syria, which uses proxies like Hezbollah to advance its hegemonic designs. They must be convinced to change course, including by ensuring that UN Resolution 1701 - which again calls for the disarmament of Hezbollah - is fully implemented.
To test the Syrians directly, as the Baker-Hamilton Commission suggested, Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and I met with President Bashar al- Assad for more than two hours. The conversation confirmed my belief that engagement with Syria could be useful in advancing our objectives across the region. The Syrian leadership will act according to its own self-interest. The challenge is to get Syria’s leaders to make a strategic decision to change direction, and shift their allegiance away from Iran.
This requires a package of incentives that will provide real benefits for playing a more constructive role and disincentives that will undermine their interests - if not endanger their survival - if they do not. These would be implemented incrementally, based on verified facts on the ground.
This comprehensive approach, similar to the one used with North Korea and Iran, must include the full participation of moderate Arab countries like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia - which, like Syria, have largely Sunni populations - as well as Turkey. There is no guarantee that this approach will save Lebanon and turn Syria into a positive force in the region—but the current policy only guarantees more of the same.
Lebanon teeters on the brink of disaster—but its leaders refuse to surrender. As Amine Gemayel, the former president of Lebanon, said in explaining why he is running to replace his son in Parliament, “We keep going. We keep fighting. We keep struggling.” The question is whether we will be a real partner in this struggle.
Op-Ed published in the Boston Globe on January 4, 2007
16 Comments
New comments for this entry are closed.
For more background info on Lebanon, check out the references in this JK blog post: A Focus on Lebanon
Also check out the blogroll at The Lebanese Bloggers as well as this Lebanese blog aggregator, Lebanese Blogger Forum.
You are absolutely right, Senator. Please continue to aggressively pursue this.
Lebanon is a very small country, but what is going on there affects the whole Middle East at this point.
Lebanon is only 4,035 square miles in area, while Connecticut has 5,349 square miles within its borders. So that means Lebanon is smaller in size than all but one American state (poor Rhode Island has only 1,214 square miles to its name).
Small in size, yes. But Lebanon is a tinderbox that could set the whole region aflame if its crisis condition continues to be ignored by us here in the United States.
A democracy is trying to emerge right before our eyes in Lebanon, but this important movement is being overshadowed, weakened by the Bush admins’ exercise in chaos creation in Iraq.
This is a small sliver of hope and light in an otherwise pretty depressing outlook for the Middle East region. How we help foster this fragile emerging of a democracy is up to us.
Do we tend to it with diplomacy, creating fertile soil for it to grow, or do we destroy it before it gains enough strength to stand on its own by sowing more seeds of hatred in the surrounding nations?
Thank you for bringing clarity to the dangers, as well as opportunities, in Lebanon and the region.
As Jewish, and not lost on the issues, diplomacy has always been what’s needed. If only to temporarily stop the violence, curb those bad habits, while economies prosper and tensions subside. Creating even a desire for peaceful co-existence.
Bush pushed Israel’s Ohlmert into a disastrous response to Hezbollah, levelling what Beirut had built back up, while the terrorist group helped with the clean-up and rebuilding. A reversal of roles we can never repeat.
There may never be peace, but a mutually beneficial end to the killing is a good start.
Many thanks, Senator.
Senator,
Thank you for calling attention to this dire situation in Lebanon and thank you Violet for taking the time to provide us all with the informational links so that we can become more informed about this unstable situation in Lebanon. I am still in the process of reading and reviewing this information. However, this situation does make me wonder why President Bush is not addressing it more aggressively and acting on it in a way to insure that Lebanon becomes a stronger democracy. Perhaps I have it wrong, but I thought our President’s goal was to instill democracy throughout the Middle East? How can he leave Lebanon in this state and ignore the consequences of not doing enough, or nothing at all and still claim his purpose in the Middle East is democracy?
Now I have to ask what can I do? How can I be of help in perhaps turning this situation around in Lebanon?
Thank You for being the voice that we need Sir. This is the kind of voice we need for our foreign policy. I can’t wait until 2008 when you are our Commander and Chief.
What is really sad about this is that the Senator has decided to relay this information not only to us, but our government (as well as a foreboding to what may happen without some serious diplomacy and attention). Once again he is not just repeating the same old news-of-the-week issues, but intelligently looking down the road for the next big issue…...you know, the kinds of things that STATESMEN do! Too many times in the last 4-5 years Senator Kerry has predicted with great accuracy what needs to happen to prevent world events from turning tragic, and yet his continuing dedication to this country is normally ignored or negatively politicized.
Let’s all hope that eventually the truth will shine through to the US and the world, not just for John’s sake, but for ours as well.
Thanks for trying every day to help our country Senator, whether everyone appreciates it or not.
“In fact, Iran is doing more in rebuilding Lebanon than Washington is doing in rebuilding New Orleans.”
Unbelievable. What is this president thinking?
Excellent article and analysis. I hope that John Kerry will push, thru the senate, the implementation of his ideas and beliefs.
“And we must redouble our efforts to strengthen the Lebanese military, which has earned the trust of the people but lacks the strength to confront Hezbollah.”
I’m not American, but it’s like my sister-land. In fact it is my sister’s land. I wonder senator, what you mean by “confront” Hezbollah. While Hezbollah is demonstrating peacefully, it doesn’t suggest to me that it intends to stage a bombastic violent coup. To me, it seems like an organisation that would benefit by opportunities to talk and opportunities to listen and opportunities to participate. Better to encourage slow disarming, rather than bullying instant disarming.
Thank you for your wisdom on the region, but I do not think your current president is the person to tackle the issues that you raise. Your president is not your greatest diplomat. Is it possible to leave him out of the loop altogether? You could tell him when it’s over. Just a hope.
Well, Wendy, the problem with your reasoning regarding Hizballah is that it’s based on an inaccurate premise: “While Hezbollah is demonstrating peacefully, it doesn’t suggest to me that it intends to stage a bombastic violent coup.” The situation in Lebanon is a lot more complicated than that.
Hizballah (also spelled Hezbollah in the West, the Arab characters don’t translate exactly) is by its nature a violent revolutionary movement. It might be useful to compare it to Ireland’s I.R.A./Sinn Fein equivalent—while it does have a social component that aids and supports like-minded citizens, it also has a very active military component that is dedicated to overthrowing the Lebanese government by force.
Bear in mind that last summer’s 34-day war in Lebanon, where Israel invaded Lebanon territory (with what some have been saying was excessive force —literally, overkill), was triggered by Hizballah’s having staged a cross-border raid back in July (in what some have been saying was a bold move but a colossal blunder) and kidnapped two Israeli soldiers.
Since Hizballah’s military component basically fought the Israelis to a draw rather than a victory for either side, its social component garnered plenty of public relations points in the region by providing financial aid to the citizens who had been displaced by that war. But that p.r. advantage is already fading, and can’t be expected to last much longer as frustration replaces gratitude within the local communities.
War damage in Lebanon is assessed at $3.6 billion. Over 1,200 Lebanese were killed, more than 3,700 wounded, and over 975,000 were left homeless. When you consider that Lebanon’s entire population before the war stood at about 3.8 million people, that’s an astoundingly high cost in human lives and property for such an ill-advised adventure on Hizballah’s part.
Also bear in mind that Hizballah is a Shi’ite revolutionary movement that is heavily funded and supplied by Syria, which has dominated Lebanon through military force for the last three decades. Syria (and Iran, funneling its support through Damascus) provided massive logistical, military, and financial support for Hizballah during last summer’s war with Israel.
Syria has made no bones about its intent to keep dominating Lebanon by means of force, and Hizballah is operating as a Syrian proxy force there in terms of pushing for the Shi’ites to take total control of the country. But they’re not the only players in the game there.
If Lebanon dissolves into another war between internal factions (its last civil war having lasted from 1975 through 1990), other groups can expect to find outside backing also. The Saudis have already indicated that they will fund and support Sunni militias in areas of the Middle East that are threatened with Shi’ite revolution. Lebanese Christian militias may turn to Israel for help, as they did during the previous civil war there.
So that’s why I described Lebanon in my earlier post as a tiny but extremely flammable tinderbox. If the situation there devolves into civil war again—which at this point seems highly likely, barring some immediate (and successful) intervention by the world community—then some of the richest and most heavily-armed nations in the entire Middle East will inevitably be drawn into it as well.
Had our nation’s integrity, influence, and power in the region not been so drastically reduced by the Bush administration’s illegal and unnecessary war of conquest in Iraq, we would stand a much better chance of being able to help defuse the crisis in Lebanon.
But there’s still plenty of ways in which America can work with other countries to keep the tinderbox from setting the whole Middle East aflame. It will take careful study, skillful diplomacy, and clear-headed thinking for that to happen—something that the current administration has already proved it can’t be trusted to get right when it comes to foreign policy.
So should we have talks with Hizballah, help mediate the conflict with it and its host country, provide aid to the war-ravaged citizens there, and try to build a realistic political alliance with Lebanon and its neighboring countries? Absolutely.
But don’t kid yourself. Hizballah isn’t going to hang up its weapons and just demonstrate peacefully in the meanwhile. It took nearly a century for Sinn Fein to gain credence as a political entity and for its violent I.R.A. wing to disarm, and the Shi’ite revolutionaries in Lebanon are every bit as tenacious now as their counterparts in Ireland were then.
Thank you for writing this, Senator. Almost anybody can spin a fanciful narrative about what’s happening in the Middle East, but it takes real courage to seek the real story, and to want to understand how it is affecting people’s lives.
Thanks Otter, for this long, clear and detailed explanation. Yes, the disarming of the IRA has taken a very long time, and Sinn Fein’s credence is still very shaky. But, Northern Ireland shows us that it can be done. And in this I gather courage to persevere.
I also believe that we cannot, in all certainty, proclaim how any group will respond to certain actions. 999 times out of 1000 maybe. I try to concentrate on the thousandth time. The exception, not the rule. It’s my trust in the goodness of humanity. If I didn’t believe this I wouldn’t bother to pay attention to the politics of world powers. I’d simply hide away and try not think. I would have no hope.
I did understand a lot more about Hizbollah’s motives in capturing three Israeli soldiers after hearing an interview by Jimmy Carter. It was the first time I saw that there was a reason for the kidnap. And let’s face it, the capture was of soldiers, not the bombing of thousands of civilians aged 0 to 100. No matter what conflict is going on, there is always another point of view. For the appalling death and devastation in Lebanon, I do not support Israel. No.
There is NEVER a reason to do this to civilians. Hizbollah was hiding amongst them? If it’s true, that is still not a reason to do all that you’ve outlined above. I give the same response as I gave the night I was told my 10 year old son was shot. It’s INEXCUSABLE!
Thanks for clarifying this, Otter. I always value your thoughts. And debate. :)
So well said, Wendy. It’s been so easy for those politically active in the US to see how arrogant and destructive our right-wing government has been, but for some reason we have been blind toward the right-wing faction ruling Israel’s government and its destructive policies. I too have listened to Jimmy Carter, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Noam Chomsky and other peacemakers who have called on everyone in the region to compromise, everyone! If might does not make right in America, then it doesn’t in the Middle East. And if we look very closely, the beginnings of terrorist groups always have their roots in poverty, disenfranchisement, and injustice of those who finally rise up. That these terrorist groups get out of hand eventually can’t be denied or tolerated, but neither can their reasons for coming into existence in the first place. Every people on this planet want justice, real justice, not the thin veneer of “justice” that existed in Ireland for so long, or supposedly exists in Palestine now, but a transparent justice which can be observed by all the world via the UN.