Quote:
Originally Posted by chafic View Post
Interesting article by Kassir
Annahar: May 6, 2005
The Return of the Lost FatherThere is always joy in the return of exiles and the return of General Michel Aoun is no exception, save for the case of his worst enemies. No one in Lebanon should view with disfavor the joy with which his supporters will receive their hero tomorrow Saturday. No one can, as well, hide the sectarian dimension of this return whether for General Aoun - after 15 years of exile - or for the crowd of his old supporters, and the new ones amongst them.
But Aoun, who wanted for himself a political and national role, certainly realizes that his return is not an emotional event only. This return is a political event and falls under political and journalistic assessment, even if any kind of assessment would take into consideration "the party of the General," not because of the General himself, but because the potentials of his supporters who have been - among others - the ammunition for the new Lebanon and who have been at the core of the making of [Lebanese] independence.
Perhaps General Aoun cannot fall under assessment and questioning, especially that he will return a week after he has been assessing others, issuing verdicts in all directions and through all [TV] screens. By the way, the primary results of these daily appearances led to the distortion of Aoun's image, leading to the fading away of the image of the lenient politician of the past few months in favor of a peoples' leader who addresses crowds with a simplistic military logic that carries within it instigation against the political class. This way, at least, no one will wrongly assess him: The returning Aoun is the Aoun that never changes, the one who judges others but is never to be judged.
But standing by the principles of the Independence Uprising mandates that all of its supporters not spare themselves of the winds of change and freedom this uprising has created. And if it were understandable, or rather likable, for the public opinion to put the leaders of the opposition at stake, there is no reason why Aoun should be an exception. On the contrary, if there were takes against X or Y that they did not live up to the promises of change that the uprising had unleashed, Aoun - for his part - gives the impression that he does not give any consideration for those who were behind this uprising for he presents himself as the father of independence and claims that it was him who brought back to Lebanon its sovereignty and freedom. Those who are close to him often describe him as "the liberator" and "Lebanon's coming Spring" in addition to other descriptions that claim the efforts of a whole population.
It might be understandable, against the background of an electoral campaign, that Aoun ignores the role of Walid Jumblatt [in the uprising] or [Jumblatt's] virtue of putting his head under the guillotine [during that uprising].
And it might be also understandable - in the same context - that Aoun considers the assassination of Rafik Hariri as merely the spark which ignited the uprising and in which the slain premier had nothing to do. Aoun might also want to forget how Marwan Hamade miraculously survived assassination.
It might be logical from Aoun's point of view to condescend the Qornet Shehwan Gathering and all the Maronite politicians other than him. He might also stay at a distance from Patriarch Sfeir - even if he does not say it - and blame the Lebanese Forces because its supporters did not join the protests that he used to call for.
But what any impartial logic cannot accept is for Aoun to ignore the role of popular mobilization in achieving independence. Perhaps the biggest irony is when Aoun justifies his claim by arguing that he brought back independence and sovereignty by highlighting his role behind the shift in the international view of Syria without giving any credit to the active role of the Aounists on the ground, lest we talk about others whom he would want to forget about! To him, it looks as if addressing "the great people of Lebanon" is as easy as uttering these words only.
The issue goes beyond a single individual claiming credit for that historic event according to a manipulated understanding of the De Gaulle experience in France. If ignoring the dimension of the popular size of the event came out of a presumed superior understanding of politics, then ignoring the role of other political forces indicates that there has been a misunderstanding about the meaning of this last [independence] confrontation. The biggest mistake that Aoun as well as other Christian factions might be committing, is to consider the Independence Uprising as the completion of one of the episodes of the civil war. In this consideration, there are two historic misconceptions at least.
The first misconception lies in confusing the role of the Syrian rule during the war, which had taken different shapes but had always been destructive, and the complex mandate system that [the Syrian rule] erected in Lebanon after the war by benefiting of what had befallen the Lebanese society during the last two chapters of the war between the years 1988 and 1991 - that is specifically during Aoun's days - and after the manipulation of Taef due to Aoun's rejection of it.
The second misconception is that the opposition of the Lebanese society to the mandate did not operate according to a military logic of exterminating the other. This opposition rather invented new collective and democratic tools. And while it remains unacceptable to ignore the role of the Aounists in these opposition networks, it is also worth reminding that the Aounist movement deprived itself for many years from further activating this role on the premise that the post-Taef state was illegitimate. Certainly, the Aounists were not alone responsible for boycotting [the parliamentary] elections of 1992, yet their ongoing elections boycott in 1996 obstructed the broadening of parliamentary opposition, which was incarnated in its refusal to support the extension of [former] President Elias Hrawi's term. The Aounists became aware of their error in the 2000 elections and later during two follow-up by-elections. Along these lines, [Aoun's] logic of boycotting state institutions might have been one of the factors that delayed the formation of a broad opposition front and therefore the formation of the trap in which the mandate system fell.
But jumping over the post-war era and its opposition - that was not less courageous than the courage of exile during which there was the building of the principles of a new democracy - does not only undermine the importance of the Independence Uprising, but also casts doubt over the idea of reform which Aoun is now calling for after he had stayed - and kept his supporters - away from this [reform] workshop for 15 years. Yet, if he recounts that [1990 - 2005] era, he won't only discover that some of his allies in the battle for independence were part of the authority - as he has been saying for days - he might as well realize that doubting these politicians was what paved the way for the establishment of the security system. Aoun has maintained this kind of doubt today as he tends to undermine the responsibility of the military - starting with the president of the republic whose term has expired and ending with the leaders of the [security] apparatuses of darkness - in leading the country to where it is now.
Those who blame Aoun for exterminating others cannot call in return for the extermination of Aoun's role or deny his importance and characteristics for there must be "something" about Aoun that brings to him the support and loyalty of activists who might be of the best that this country has produced. Those activists have sacrificed all what is precious to them for they have believed in an idea which they have always seen incarnated in this man even if they sometimes had to go against their convictions whenever he decided so for reasons they could never grasp.
Loyalty to the might of those supporters and their commitment is what makes of tomorrow a day for celebration worth of the respect of all the Lebanese. This requires special attention from Aoun whereby he should not come forward as the father of independence because that way, he would be losing the meaning of the [Independence Uprising] achievement. Perhaps the biggest gift Aoun presents to his citizens on his day of return is for him not to come victoriously but to show up cheering for a victory that he and others prepared for and that the Lebanese, from all walks of life, made without any aim at monopolizing it.
Thanks Chafic for the article...
I have highlighted a few points of interest which I will come back to later (am in a hurry now).
As for the overall content of the article, I have to admitt that I agree with fpm_stanford on this, It is elitist par excellence... with the usual attacks on a 'certain' populist speech.
You might not agree on populist speeches, but you cannot ignore the widespread approval amongst the popular masses.
The behavior "inta ma tefham, ne7na mnefham 3annak" is something I dislike, and Samir Kassir unfortunately in this article represents that school of thought.
Quote:
his supporters who have been - among others - the ammunition for the new Lebanon and who have been at the core of the making of [Lebanese] independence.
The last time I checked, besides FPM and to a certain extent LF, no one resisted the Syrians between 1990-2005.
Quote:
a peoples' leader who addresses crowds with a simplistic military logic that carries within it instigation against the political class
It helps when the majority of our political class is made of former warlords, corrupt politicians, and feudal leaders. Maybe the crowds are genuinely fed up with the political class.
This is the type of elitist speech that I have been talking about!
Quote:
he presents himself as the father of independence and claims that it was him who brought back to Lebanon its sovereignty and freedom
I think GMA deserves credit for his 15 year struggle to oust the Syrians from Lebanon. He deserves more praise than Jumblatt for that matter.
Quote:
Aoun ignores the role of Walid Jumblatt [in the uprising] or [Jumblatt's] virtue of putting his head under the guillotine [during that uprising].
I leave that to your own judgement.
I still remember that Jumblatt was only asking for a Syrian redeployment to the Bekaa valley.
I dont know if it is right to compare GMA & FPM's 15 year struggle, with Jumblatt's stance post Hariri assasination, although GMA, when asked about Jumblatt's stance when he was still in France, replied with: shou baddkon ye2tlou!
Quote:
Aoun considers the assassination of Rafik Hariri as merely the spark which ignited the uprising and in which the slain premier had nothing to do
To those who are gullible to believe that Hariri was working on ousting the Syrians from Lebanon, I will tell u a story that GMA told us when we visited him a while back: In 2004, post SALSRA & UN 1559, When FPM was sending out invitations to the Lebanese leaders to discuss the post-Syrian era, Hariri's words were: "rou7o rou7o, 3am ta3mlo di3aye la 7alkon"
Quote:
It might be logical from Aoun's point of view to condescend the Qornet Shehwan Gathering and all the Maronite politicians other than him
the elections showed that it wasnt just Aoun! but that might be "the populist" speech that he dislikes.
Quote:
highlighting his role behind the shift in the international view of Syria without giving any credit to the active role of the Aounists on the ground
It reminds me of the yellow journalists trying to create a wedge between Aoun and the FPM activists. ya3ne FPMers radyin, bass Samir Kassir mish rade!
Quote:
The first misconception lies in confusing the role of the Syrian rule during the war, which had taken different shapes but had always been destructive, and the complex mandate system that [the Syrian rule] erected in Lebanon after the war by benefiting of what had befallen the Lebanese society during the last two chapters of the war between the years 1988 and 1991 - that is specifically during Aoun's days
confusing the role? what the hell...
I like how they tend to blame Aoun for the Syrian invasion. ya3ne, it is because of Aoun that the Syrians invaded and took control of Lebanon.
walla shou hel 7mar Aoun
Quote:
and after the manipulation of Taef due to Aoun's rejection of it
Thats the icing on the cake...
So Syria manipulated Taef due to Aoun's rejection of it....
2iddei fakkar fiya heyde??? This type of intellectual thinking surely beats me
Quote:
This opposition rather invented new collective and democratic tools
ma32oule shou hel 7mar Aoun, he couldnt be a bit more creative, and come up with a novel way to say: daroure, shar3e, mou2akkat
If Kassir believes that Aoun wasnt the main player in forcing a Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, I think we all agree it wasnt this so called opposition.
سيسقط رئيس الجمهورية في أخر الشهر: لم يسقط.
لن نعطيهم الثلث الضامن :اخذوا الثلث الضامن.
لن نسمح بمرور قانون الستين :مر قانون الستين.
لن نحاور خارج لبنان :ذهب إلى قطر.
لن ننتخب ميشال سليمان: سينتخب ميشال سليمان.
نريد قوات ردع عربية : روح بلط البحر.
تستطيع أن تضيف مئات التصاريح الكاذبة لسمير جعجع ويمكن تصنيفها بالساذجة أو بالكاذبة و المدهش أن هنالك من يصدقه.
Contact Info 
