October 23, 2012
NEW YORK -- Following events in
Lebanon from the United States, as I have done during the past week, leaves one
with the impression that most media in the U.S. are eager to see a resumption
of the devastating and wasteful civil war that ravaged Lebanon for 15 years
until 1990. Virtually every story on Lebanon is framed in the lens of the
possible return to sectarian civil strife as a result of the spillover of the
Syrian conflict.
The reality seems rather different to me, despite the many weaknesses and
dysfunctional aspects of Lebanese governance. The international press corps and
many in the political classes should wise up and see the country as something
more than a bomb waiting to explode repeatedly.
The political tensions and a handful of local clashes following the
assassination last Friday of Internal Security Forces Intelligence Bureau head
Brigadier General Wissam al-Hassan reflected a tragic but rather routine
sequence of sentiments and events in this country, where political
assassinations have occurred regularly for half a century. Millions of Lebanese
instantly feared a recurrence of the serial political killings that followed
the assassination of the late Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in early 2005. Some
took to the streets to express themselves in the time-tested manner of burning
tires and blocking a few streets.
At the Hassan funeral Sunday, the weaknesses and amateurism of some Lebanese
politicians surfaced. Understandably angry members of the March 14 coalition in
opposition fired up the crowd by demanding the resignation of the government of
Prime Minister Najib Mikati. Former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, normally a
rational man who shouldered the responsibility of power with great dignity and
resolve in the difficult years following the Hariri assassination, succumbed to
a moment of reckless silliness when he said Sunday that Mikati’s cabinet was a
“government of assassination,” given the numerous assassinations that occurred
during the years when March 14 and Siniora ran the government.
His and other fiery statements prompted a small crowd of excited youth to try
and storm the government headquarters in central Beirut, and they were quickly
dispersed by some forceful work of the internal security forces. A few hours
after this incident, senior March 14 leaders, including former Prime Minister
Saad Hariri, called for calm, insisting that their desire to topple the
government should be achieved through peaceful and democratic means. So they
are now boycotting all contacts with the government, which is most
unimpressive.
While most media coverage of Lebanon that I have seen in the United States
tends to fall into narrative and hysterical categories that describe clashes
and see them in the context of possibly returning to civil war, my sense is
that the historian’s perspective of identifying new trends and political
factors is much more useful today to grasp what is going on in Lebanon. In this
context, the bottom line from the last week’s events suggests to me that the
politicians’ irresponsible emotionalism and the public’s instant worries are
both routine developments that have recurred in Lebanon for many decades,
unfortunately. Top-level political assassinations and instant street clashes
that would shatter most other countries are taken in stride by most Lebanese,
who stay home for 36 hours and then resume their normal life routines.
There will not be a return to civil war because the most important new
development in Lebanon in recent years -- since February 2005 to be exact -- is
a more determined attitude and enhanced capabilities on the part of the central
government in the face of the stresses that often threaten to tear apart
Lebanese society. The principal political actors in Lebanon have had numerous
opportunities to resume serious fighting in recent years, and every time have
pulled back from the brink in order to refrain from the path of civil war. In
the past three years, the armed forces and internal security have acted much
more forcefully and quickly to stop local clashes from growing or spreading,
and the national dialog committee continues to present an opportunity for all
parties to seek a route towards stable and sensible governance.
The presidency of Michel Suleiman also offers a more activist touch, while the
forensic investigative capabilities of the internal security forces continue to
improve, as seen by the successful interception of the alleged plan by former
minister Michel Samaha to bring explosives from Syria to destabilize Lebanon,
and the detection of Israeli espionage rings. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon
that has investigated and will try those accused of killing Rafik Hariri is
another new element in the young drive to stop the legacy of political
violence.
These and other factors probably explain why Wissam el-Hassan was killed by
some party that does not want Lebanon to achieve a strong indigenous capability
to investigate and put a stop to political crimes. Whether that party is in
Syria, Lebanon, Israel or elsewhere remains to be seen.
Rami G. Khouri is Editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and
Director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International
Affairs at the American University of Beirut, in Beirut, Lebanon. You can
follow him @ramikhouri.
Copyright © 2012 Rami G. Khouri -- distributed by Agence Global