HA's weapons and the Christian vote, a 'nightmare' or a scarecrow?

[Tayyar Keserwen]

The issue of the weapons of HA should become again a matter of principle!

[Secular Lebanon]

What's ironic is that, as Ibrahim Najjar recognized, the arguments used today by Kataeb against HA are the same arguments that were used in the late 60s and early 70s against Kataeb weapons.

And vice versa, the arguments used today by HA to justify its holding weapons are the same arguments that were used by Kataeb back then to justify their weapons then.

Remember that Kataeb started forming camps and accumulating weapons in 1967. In 1972, they had thirty heavily armed camps already. At the time, Rachid Karame, Raymond Edde and Kamal Joumblatt were telling them : "there should be no arms outside the realm of the State". But the Kataeb did not care, they said that they felt threatened and that the State could not protect them. Exactly what HA is saying today.

Even though he is a Kataeb, Ibrahim Najjar had the honesty to recognize the similarity.

So Kataeb do not have the credibility to attack HA weapons, since their entire history is based on using similar arguments to justify their being an armed militia.

[mike-ramma]

Originally Posted by Greg Davis

If the Civil war has taught us anything, Confrontation never solves anything and we always end up at square one.

The 10452 km2 is an area demarked by the colonials of the day and not Lebanese.

What Lebanon needs is a referendum. And the Lebanese people need to determine what type of country they want. If the majority agree to a system, so be it, but if the difference is too farse, What is the harm in disection?
Nations are not build on stalemates.
We are better off building two or three smaller nations, that rise an prosper simultaneously, and we could co-exist as neighbours, or we could just accept status quo, and spend the next few decades bickering.

I do not understand why you people insist on putting aside all the principles of unitiy,consolidation,and solidarity within the same homeland in which all the segments of the lebanese spectrum live amid peace and prosper.You always revive the idea of federating our country ,that we are all rooted to,regardless of all the wars and conflicts.Building up several divided countries will not,what so ever,resolve the problem that is entrenched in the lebanese mentality,on the other hand,it will enhance the control of the super powers and their interventions in our affairs.The harm of dissection is beyond imagination and this page has been turned in the aftermath of the war, and will not see the light again.This country will not encounter the thrive if some people ,like you,still think about federation and dissection.

[Secular Lebanon]

Originally Posted by mike-ramma

I do not understand why you people insist on putting aside all the principles of unitiy,consolidation,and solidarity within the same homeland in which all the segments of the lebanese spectrum live amid peace and prosper.You always revive the idea of federating our country ,that we are all rooted to,regardless of all the wars and conflicts.Building up several divided countries will not,what so ever,resolve the problem that is entrenched in the lebanese mentality,on the other hand,it will enhance the control of the super powers and their interventions in our affairs.The harm of dissection is beyond imagination and this page has been turned in the aftermath of the war, and will not see the light again.This country will not encounter the thrive if some people ,like you,still think about federation and dissection.

There has always been 20 % of extremists in the Christian community who think in terms of us vs them and do not believe in a united Lebanon.
300 being the typical us vs them movie, I can guess from the fellow's avatar that he might belong to this group. They believe in clash of civilizations. They have racist tendencies (kammie vs naou3ie and other idiocies...) Thank God today, these fanatics do not have the possibility to make their sick dreams come true. They had their chance in 1975 and they slaughtered so many innocents that today most of the Christians reject them. But we should make sure that Samy Gemayel never gains too much power because he is one of those fanatics and he might put Lebanon in danger.

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Secular Lebanon

What's ironic is that, as Ibrahim Najjar recognized, the arguments used today by Kataeb against HA are the same arguments that were used in the late 60s and early 70s against Kataeb weapons.

And vice versa, the arguments used today by HA to justify its holding weapons are the same arguments that were used by Kataeb back then to justify their weapons then.

Remember that Kataeb started forming camps and accumulating weapons in 1967. In 1972, they had thirty heavily armed camps already. At the time, Rachid Karame, Raymond Edde and Kamal Joumblatt were telling them : "there should be no arms outside the realm of the State". But the Kataeb did not care, they said that they felt threatened and that the State could not protect them. Exactly what HA is saying today.

Even though he is a Kataeb, Ibrahim Najjar had the honesty to recognize the similarity.

So Kataeb do not have the credibility to attack HA weapons, since their entire history is based on using similar arguments to justify their being an armed militia.

It turned out that both Kataeb and HA were right, up until today the government cannot protect lebanon from the Palestinians nor from the Israelis; the two reasons why kataeb and HA decided to have their own weapons

[Souss]

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

The weapons of the resistance will always remain a subject of severe controversy, but regardless of how one feels towards HA, there are some key facts that should never be ignored. I will list a few that I am sure have been mentioned throughout this gigantic thread kept alive thanks to Joseph Lubnan’s relentless efforts at taking stabs at the MoU. I will try to explain as best as I can, the position of Dark Angel who was born and grew up in Mount Lebanon, who was raised as a Maronite, and who is an FPM supporter, towards HA’s weapons.

Thanks for taking the time to write this articulate post. We need more threads like these, and less of the garbage ones that are scattered all over this forum.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Do the weapons offer any advantages at all?
the answer to this one is very clear, and doesn’t require a degree in nuclear physics to be seen. The weapons offer a double fold advantage, in times of war they constitute a deterrent that can stop the Israeli adventures over our soil, and in peace negotiations they can constitute a leverage point either towards the prevention of the nationalization of the Palestinians, or towards alleviating a portion of the huge debt accrued through years of devastating fiscal policies.

It depends for who. They offer advantages if used in a framework of national interests, meaning if Hezbollah's policies are national ones. Now while HA policies do sometimes overlap with Lebanese (national) interests, like for example in the case of deterrence, there is ample evidence that their policies are generally not Lebanon-centric, but Shia-centric (there are obvious historical reasons as to why this is the case).

So yes there are advantages for the country, in the few cases where HA's Shia and party-centric interests overlap with national ones.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Do the weapons constitute any risk at all?
All weapons constitute risks, especially if they are outside the government’s control. However the level of risk is associated with the level of responsibility of those in command. HA’s leadership has proven once and again that it has a better feel of responsibilities than many folks who control the decision making process within the government, especially the ones who contributed for long decades to keep the internal civil war ignited.

This is an extremely short-sighted view. You are basing your assessment of HA's leadership based on what time span? At best 15 years, but more probably 3 years.

How do you know there won't be a shift in the future from what you can argue seems to be a "moderate" current HA leadership, either because the leadership will change, or because of a conscious policy change? What guarantees that the next Secretary-General won't be a hard-liner Tufayli (or Dalzi ) style? Or worse?

You're talking about a group that as recently as 20 years ago was calling for establishing an Islamic state in Lebanon. Some argue this isn't true anymore, meaning there's been a policy shift. How do we know the policy won't shift back, especially given that:

- We don't know anything about the processes within hezbollah. Nothing as of now guarantees it won't shift back to previous policies.
- Hezbollah has not disavowed its goal of having an Islamic state, even though it says it won't impose it. But being an Iranian-inspired group, and if Iran is any indication of how they function, well they didn't exactly get to Islamic Republic by referendum there. They used force.

Yet FPMers give HA a free pass. Very short-sighted.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Is it safe to strip the weapons away from the resistance while the Palestinians are armed?
One of the main problems I have with the Febers is their apparent obliviousness towards the Palestinian camps and their concentration on HA’s weapons. Doesn’t common sense require that the disarmament, if any, begins with the Palestinian fractions, inside and outside the camps? Shouldn’t the devastating events of Nahr-El-Bared be indication enough to where the real threat resides? The threats presented by these camps are many folds the ones that an armed HA presents.

So can one assume that ignoring the Palestinian, the extremists and the jihadists threats is in agreement with a foreign agenda that finds HA to be a nuisance and is working to eliminate internally even at the cost of an internal civil war? If that is the case, can one entrust the Febers on the subject of governance despite their obvious commitment to a foreign agenda?

Foreign agendas are all over the place. Sometimes local and foreign agendas overlap, and you have the (correct) impression that local parties have a commitment to a foreign agenda. This is the case all across the political spectrum.

The "Febers" obviously don't have national interests as their priorities. But one shouldn't approach the issue of HA's weapons by comparing them to the FM & co. bunch.Which brings us to the next section:

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

How should the subject of HA’s weapons be approached?
There exists two ways to approach this subject, either peacefully or confrontationally.

The peaceful approach will require years of establishing mutual trust between the different Lebanese fractions and years of nurturing the concept of confessional free citizenship. Only when that’s achieved can progress be made towards a peaceful solution.

The confrontational approach is one that many regional and global powers were investing in, and was spoiled mainly through the MoU. It goes without saying that all the different scenarios for this approach will end in a bloody civil war, one that is more likely to make the last 30 years look like a bliss in comparison. This is the path many short-sighted and ill willed leaderships were trying to push us upon; plenty of bloodshed awaits on this path, and there will be no winner at the end.

Securing the national territory is essential to a viable country. Provide a suitable alternative to HA's weapons, and the weapons will go away. The only suitable alternative must come from the LAF. The real question is can you strengthen the LAF in alliance with HA, which is in direct competition with it? For example, Nasrallah opposed that the army enter Nahr-el-Bared, arguably because it would show that the LAF is able to accomplish a security and disarming mission.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Is a national resistance a possibility?
it is obvious that even HA are working on an exit strategy for the weapons issue. They have left the doors wide open in their 2009 parliamentary electoral program for a national defense strategy that will change HA’s monopoly over the resistance into a national one. That said, the process will not be easy, and cannot be accomplished without credibility and trust. That said, the presence of walid jumblat and samir geagea in the dialogue sessions dedicated to the nationalization of the resistance weapons is proof enough that these sessions are for show only, the HA folks are much smarter than to offer their necks to the likes of these warlords.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Do I feel threatened by these weapons as a Christian?
As someone who survived the Lebanese civil war and witnessed plenty of its atrocities, I should have plenty of fears from an armed and strong HA. However, and contrary to the expectations, experience and facts on the ground indicate otherwise. I have come to realize that the threat doesn’t necessarily flow through religious boundaries, but rather through ethical ones. In fact it is those who have no ethics and no respect for human life that constitute the most danger, and they are the ones responsible for the countless massacres that plagued Lebanon, most often these massacres were carried out between folks from the same religion and the same confession.

I believe that all evidence at hands seems to indicate that HA’s leadership in the person of SHN, shares plenty of the respect we have for life regardless of the messages it sends towards the israelis, and we share the same sets of basic human values, including freedom of worship (believe it or not), so from this perspective, I do not feel threatened at all by an armed HA, despite the fact that as an FPMer I am actively seeking to transform this resistance into a national one.

I personally have no fear visiting the south, Baalbek, dahyeh or the south, and for the matter of fact I visit most of these regions when I happen to be in Lebanon, and why shouldn't I? they are all part of Lebanon and i feel it in my interaction with the people there, and i felt it long before the MoU. However I’ll never go inside a camp even if my life depended on it.

That said, I want to point out that throughout the Lebanese war, there was no Christian/Shiites massacres carried out, despite having a big Christian population in Shiite areas, and a big Shiite population in Christian areas. This does not mean that all other confessions are monsters, and it doesn’t mean that all Shiites are angels, it simply offers proof that we have managed to keep peaceful relations during times when the tensions were very high.

A word to the wise
HA’s weapons were never presented as a problem by the ruling majority prior to the MoU and the alliance with FPM. The LF candidates assisted to ‘mahrajen el mukawame’ prior to the 2005 parliamentary elections and amine gemayel compared SHN to his father pierre gemayel.

The subject of these weapons is simply being used as a scare tactic to erode FPM’s base on the eve of the 2009 elections. I hope the images of the LF candidates and that of amine gemayel praising SHN and HA’s weapons in 2005 will alert the voters to the fact that the Febers are far from being sincere and are only playing this card only to target the Christian street and erode FPM’s support, and that should be motive enough to the voters to hold on tighter to FPM and support its vision towards a peaceful solution.

(note: Febers = Feb14ers)

Again, reliance on your perception of Nasrallah (I disagree with some of the specifics) is a very short-sighted view, in light of the short time span where HA appears to have its current policies, the historical positions that it has taken and the opacity of its decision-making processes.

[Greg Davis]

Originally Posted by mike-ramma

I do not understand why you people insist on putting aside all the principles of unitiy,consolidation,and solidarity within the same homeland in which all the segments of the lebanese spectrum live amid peace and prosper.You always revive the idea of federating our country ,that we are all rooted to,regardless of all the wars and conflicts.Building up several divided countries will not,what so ever,resolve the problem that is entrenched in the lebanese mentality,on the other hand,it will enhance the control of the super powers and their interventions in our affairs.The harm of dissection is beyond imagination and this page has been turned in the aftermath of the war, and will not see the light again.This country will not encounter the thrive if some people ,like you,still think about federation and dissection.

The thought of federalism isn't my preferance, but rather a practical solution, whether it be temporary or permanant. I uphold the thought of a multicultural society dearly, but Lebanese society isn't mature enough to put aside their sectarian differences for the greater good.

Unfortunately, whether it be the Sunnis, Shiites, Dreuze, Maronites, Armenians, Orthtodox, MelKlites or the alawites. The loyalty isn't to a political program , but rather blind following of ones prospective sectarian leaders and the decisions those leaders make.

There is no accountability , nor control.

The absense of true democracy with the 'tawafouki system' makes accountability less and less applicable.

Lebanon is and always ever will be a group of sectarian cantons sattered across its surface. If you are deluded in the thought that the Lebanese people were ever unified 'ever', please pull your head out of the sand. The only thing that unifies the Lebanese people, is the affairs of other groups within the country.

The reason Lebanon's politicians avoid the Federalism topic, is because of their fear of accountability. The moment the Lebanese people have a mandate to hold their politicians accountable, will be the end of a majority of Lebanons political groups.

The current system has proven to be a huge failure and the success of alternative systems abroads should at least make one wonder. You see, the UAE system works, so does the swiss, the New Iraqi system is showing great early signs,and the fmr Yugolslavia hasn't been any better.

I still don't see how you can convince yourself that if a certain sectarian group within a nation of numerous sectarian groups were to bear arms, while the others groups have no decision in the arms and their uses, and must accept whatever decision that sectarian group makes, and suffer the consequences and reprocussions. And you talk of unity.

Have a happy and safe Easter

'Elmasee7 kam, 7akkan kam'

[joseph_lubnan]

I suggest that this thread be locked and shut down as well, like every other Hezbollah thread. The elections are approaching.

[Tayyar Keserwen]

Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan

I suggest that this thread be locked and shut down as well, like every other Hezbollah thread. The elections are approaching.

Ktir mahdoum sayir ya abolzouz...

[shadow1]

Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan

I suggest that this thread be locked and shut down as well, like every other Hezbollah thread. The elections are approaching.

yalla ija! how are you JL?