[tadamon-l] Lebanon: Beirut in Crisis. Interview with Samah Idriss in Beirut.

[Tadamon!]

* Lebanon: Beirut in Crisis
Interview with activist & publisher Samah Idriss in Beirut, Lebanon.

http://tadamon.resist.ca/index.php/post/1397

Lebanon is currently facing a major political crisis, as armed battles have 
erupted in multiple districts in Beirut, battles between pro-government forces 
and the political opposition backed by the Lebanese movement Hezbollah. 
Currently the Lebanese capital is divided, as opposition forces maintain a hold 
in West Beirut, having handed control in certain districts to the Lebanese 
Army, while the western-backed Lebanese government remains in lock down at the 
Lebanese Parliament buildings.

Today Lebanon's government has maintained a contested hold on official state 
power in Lebanon without representation from Hezbollah or other opposition 
parties for over one year. This week the government announced that Hezbollah's 
independent communications network or telephone system operating in Lebanon as 
illegal, sparking the current crisis. Hezbollah's independent telephone or 
communications system is considered to be a critical element to the success of 
the Lebanese resistance to Israel in successfully halting Israel's 2006 attack 
on Lebanon.

Lebanon's current crisis revolves around pointed divisions on the future 
definition for the country, a division involving countless perspectives in 
Lebanon, however a conflict that pits the pro-U.S. government and a Hezbollah 
lead opposition which opposes western intervention in the Middle East on 
opposite sides. Lebanon's current conflict exists within a broader political 
crisis in the Middle East in the context of the U.S.-backed "War on Terror", 
spanning from Palestine, to Iraq, to Egypt.

Samah Idriss is a co-founder of the Campaign to Boycott Supporters of Israel, a 
lexicographer, a literary critic who earned a PhD from Columbia University in 
1991, and is editor-in-chief of al-Adab, a Lebanese arts and culture magazine 
based in Beirut. Samah is also deeply involved in Civilian Resistance Campaign 
in Lebanon that organized between people in Lebanon and internationals to 
provide direct aid at a grassroots level to people impacts by the 2006 Israeli 
attack on Lebanon. Samah Idriss spoke with Tadamon!'s Stefan Christoff 
concerning the current political crisis in Lebanon.


Stefan Christoff: First can you describe the current situation in Beirut?

Samah Idriss: Now everything is relatively calm. All the offices of the 
government-backed Future Movement in West Beirut have surrendered and many of 
the pro-government 'fighters', many who were invited to come from Northern 
Lebanon, often without even knowing that they were going to fight, have 
surrendered to the opposition and the opposition has handed these people and 
offices over to the Lebanese Army.

Now that the forces from the March 14th 'movement' have lost this battle, 
pro-government forces claim that they weren't preparing for a war, that they 
aren't organizing armed militias and that they weren't instigating the 
fighting, while claiming that Hezbollah is acting on behalf of Iran and Syria.

It is critical to remember that this current situation started when the 
Lebanese government, a couple days ago, decided to declare the Hezbollah 
communications system or independent telephone grid as illegal. This is 
critical because this communications system was a major reason behind 
Hezbollah's victory against Israel in July 2006. Given that the Hezbollah 
system isn't wireless it is harder for Israel or the U.S. to crack or decode 
this communications network. This communication system was key to Hezbollah 
preventing Israeli forces from knowing the positions and movements of Hezbollah 
and it's leadership during the war in 2006.

So this current scenario commenced with an instigation from the western-backed 
government. Additionally the government wanted to kick-out a person in charge 
at the international airport in Beirut who is close to Hezbollah, in order to 
replace them with another person who would not be able to assist Hezbollah to 
know who travels in and out at the airport.

These two actions from the government, the declaration of Hezbollah's 
communication network as illegal and the attempt to oust a Hezbollah 
sympathetic person at Beirut's international airport, instigated the attack 
from the opposition, lead by Hezbollah.

West Beirut is now under the control of the Lebanese Army, after the opposition 
took over the party offices representing the March 14th movement. Currently 
it's not clear if things will develop in other areas in Lebanon such as in the 
Mountains, this remains unclear.

Stefan Christoff: Now concerning the way that the current situation is being 
reported in the western press, we are reading a basic depiction that involves 
armed clashes between pro-government militias and Hezbollah supporters 
throughout Beirut. Also there is a focus on distilling the current scenario 
into sectarian terms, breaking down the division as fought between Sunni and 
Shi'ite forces. Also you highlighted that Hezbollah or opposition forces have 
handed over certain pro-government offices or Future Movement offices to the 
Lebanese Army, which is not being widely reported in the western press. 
Mainstream media in North America is reporting that West Beirut is under 
Hezbollah's control. In this light could you offer your critiques towards the 
mainstream media.s coverage concerning the events in Beirut within the last 48 
hours, both western media and media in the Middle East?

Samah Idriss: Media that is allied with the government in Lebanon aims to 
present the current situation simply as sectarian strife. Equaling coverage 
that claims the Shi'ite are invading the Sunni West Beirut. First it's 
important to highlight that Beirut was never strictly Sunni, while the people 
who are now fighting for the opposition, many belong to Beirut, live in Beirut, 
a city that has never been just Sunni but a mixture of all religious sects in 
Lebanon. This is one critical point.

Clearly there is a strategy from the government and pro-government forces to 
portray Hezbollah as the outsiders, to try to portray Hezbollah as a force 
coming to change the nature of Beirut by bringing in Shi'ite elements, Iranian 
elements, Persian elements, barbarian elements, etc. All oriental stereotypes 
that mainstream western media and some mainstream Arab media will quickly 
adopt. Not certain however that this portrayal for Hezbollah could work in the 
Arab media because Hezbollah is widely respected as the major defender for the 
Arab cause, for the Palestinian cause.

Across the Middle East the mainstream Sunni populations don't view Hezbollah or 
it's leader Hassan Nasrallah as a sectarian leader or simply a Shi'ite leader. 
However the mainstream pro-government media in Lebanon attempt to portray 
Hezbollah as completely a sectarian movement, in tune with the political lines 
fostered by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, France and the U.S.

Government forces in Lebanon claim they represent a peaceful vision for the 
country with their common slogan, "I Love Life", while claiming that Lebanon is 
being invaded by the violent Hezbollah now in West Beirut.

Stefan Christoff: Now concerning recent events that lead to the current 
situation, there was a call for a general strike put forward by the General 
Labor Confederation for May 7th. Clearly there is an economic reality to the 
current situation in Lebanon, growing poverty rates, little employment 
opportunities in the country, which presents a larger economic context to 
recent events. Could you offer a critique within an economic framework in the 
context of the current situation in Beirut?

Samah Idriss: Unfortunately the opposition isn't directly connecting the 
current situation to Lebanon's economic crisis. A major political defect to the 
opposition.

Currently Lebanon is experiencing many major economic problems, the minimum 
wage rests very low and the General Labor Confederation called a strike to 
demand a rise for the minimum wage in Lebanon. The government conceded just 
prior to the strike to slightly raise the minimum wage, not meeting the just 
demand put forward by the national union of workers for fair wages in Lebanon. 
Still even with the raise to the minimum wage proposed by the government one 
could not sustain themselves or their family on this very low wage.

Although the opposition, lead-by Hezbollah, is allied with the General Labor 
Confederation, the opposition has not presented a solid economic critique of 
the government. Unfortunately Lebanon's economic reality and it's impacts 
economically on people don't rank very high in the priorities put forward by 
the opposition. This is a major pitfall from the Lebanese opposition today.

Stefan Christoff: It could be argued that the motivation for the youth to take 
the streets to participate in the current clashes is directly connected to the 
lack of opportunities economically or for employment today in Lebanon today. 
Could you comment on this?

Samah Idriss: Clearly the terrible economic situation plays an important role 
in the current clashes. However the people who are now fighting for the 
opposition are organized, it's not a popular uprising or rebellion in the 
traditional sense, the opposition is being lead by organized elements who have 
specific goals and a specific agenda. At the same time there are some 
unorganized elements who burned things randomly, however they are a minority. 
Broadly speaking the opposition forces are a political movement that is 
extremely well organized.

Also it is critical to note that many pro-government forces who fought against 
the opposition in recent days, were people traveled from extremely impoverished 
areas like Akkar in Northern Lebanon, lead by the Future Movement to Beirut who 
was offering money to impoverished people to fight against opposition forces in 
Beirut. In certain cases people coming from Akkar weren't even aware prior to 
arriving in Beirut that they were coming to the capital to fight, thinking that 
they were coming to Beirut to fill labor positions, these are people who were 
manipulated by the Future Movement.

Many people from Akkar in this context quickly surrendered to opposition forces 
in West Beirut, declaring on local T.V. and radio that they weren't aware that 
they were being lead by pro-government forces, mainly the Future Movement, to 
Beirut to fight the opposition. Also some youth who fought for the opposition 
forces were lead to fight with money, however this is a minority. However it's 
important to recognize that the terrible economic situation in Lebanon is 
leading people to fight in multiple cases.

Unfortunately now people are not speaking about issues facing workers today in 
Lebanon, the critical economic issues that the General Labor Confederation put 
forward have been lost in the mainstream discussions surrounding the violence 
of recent days, while economics played a critical role in creating the current 
situation.

Stefan Christoff: Let's focus on the current government in Lebanon. Over one 
year has passed since Hezbollah representatives quit the government, the 
opposition has declared the current government as illegitimate. Can you present 
your perspectives on the current government in Lebanon, lead by Prime Minister 
Fouad Siniora, it's alliances to the governments of U.S., France, Canada, but 
also it's handling on the current crisis in Lebanon.

Samah Idriss: Lebanon's government today is unconstitutional. A government that 
isn't in tune with Lebanon's constitution in the sense that it the government 
is suppose to represent all sects and communities in Lebanon. As soon as 
Hezbollah's Ministers withdrew from the government it became an illegitimate 
government. Now the government maintains that it remains constitutional or 
legitimate as it refused to acknowledge the withdrawal of the Hezbollah 
ministers, not choosing alternative ministers to represent the Shi'ite 
community, however clearly it's an unconstitutional government.

On an international level, obviously this government is allied with the U.S., 
with France, with Saudi Arabia, with Egypt, viewing itself as part of the U.S. 
or E.U. political agenda in the Middle East, that they put forward with the 
empty slogan, "I Love Life", in Lebanon. Today the government presents itself 
to the west as fighting a Syrian and Iranian axis that is based on a culture of 
martyrdom or a cultural of death, as the government claims, while the current 
government represents western values in Lebanon, values put forward with empty 
slogans that utilize words like, 'freedom', 'sovereignty' and 'independence'.

Actually the government also uses language to present Hezbollah as somehow an 
external force to Lebanon, using similar language that we use in Lebanon to 
describe Israeli forces. While at the time when a real external threat invaded 
Lebanon in 2006, the Israeli army, the current government did nothing to 
resist, contrary to their slogans about 'sovereignty', 'independence' and 
'freedom'.

Stefan Christoff: Want to discuss the current crisis in Lebanon as related to 
the war between Lebanon and Israel in 2006. Hassan Nasrallah has made clear the 
importance of Hezbollah.s independent telephone network to the resistance 
against Israel's invasion in 2006, citing the communications network as a 
critical element to Hezbollah.s resistance strategy. In reading western press 
reports on the current crisis in Lebanon there are little parallels or 
connections drawn between the 2006 Israeli attack on Lebanon and the current 
crisis. Could you expand on the ways in which the current crisis and the 2006 
Israeli invasion are intertwined?

Samah Idriss: Hezbollah's telecommunication network is an important weapon for 
the resistance movement in Lebanon, playing a critical role in 2006 war. It a 
sense the communications system is even more important than Hezbollah's rockets 
or weaponry. In 2006 the entire weapons arsenal would have done little without 
the telecommunications network. Now for the Lebanese government to demand to 
control this communications network, or for it to be dismantled, is equivalent 
to demanding that Hezbollah hand-over their arms to the government.

Israel and the U.S. first wanted to disarm Hezbollah through U.N. Resolution 
1559 politically, with support from western-backed forces in Lebanon. Once this 
strategy failed the U.S. and Israel tried to disarm Hezbollah by force in 2006 
through an invasion. In a sense it was the U.S. that invaded Lebanon in 2006. 
This attempt to disarm Hezbollah failed due to the Lebanese resistance. Now 
again the same forces are attempting to disarm Hezbollah, however through a 
different strategy, using different titles, this time the focus is on the 
telecommunications network of Hezbollah in Lebanon a critical element to 
Hezbollah's arms.

Given this context it is clear why Hezbollah, as expressed by a press 
conference given the Hassan Nasrallah this week, was outraged by the 
government's decision to attempt to dismantle this telecommunications network, 
that without a doubt assisted in saving Lebanese lives during the 2006 Israeli 
attack.

* Read an interview with Samah Idriss conducted for Electronic Intifada in 
2005, on-line at:

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4155.shtml

-----------------------