|
General Michel
Aoun's Alliance with Hezbollah: A Bizarre and Groundless Marriage of
Opportunism
By:
Elias Bejjani-LCCC/Chairman
November 20/2006
"The positions of those afflicted with
contradiction between acts and words cannot be reassuring. Such
individuals desire one thing and its opposite at the same time"
(General Aoun on 16/06/2000).
I would like to tell my readers that I am really
happy and extremely pleased with the many emails, phones and faxes,
both negative and positive, that I have been receiving from the
Diaspora and back home since I started publishing this series of
editorials. In response to those who are accusing me of creating
division among the sovereignists' ranks, I borrow my reply from
Edmund Burke, the well known English statesman and political
philosopher (1729-1797):
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to
do nothing."
In this fifth episode from General Michel Aoun's series, the prime
focus will be on a set of miscellaneous selected quotations from the
man's documented speeches, theses and political positions that focus
all on Hezbollah's weapons, south Lebanon, Lebanon's sovereignty,
independence and security.
My prime objective is to give our people, as well as our world wide
friends, the chance to examine thoroughly General Aoun's positions,
promises, pledges, convictions, his party's 2005 parliamentary
electoral platform, his alliances and then check these against the
extent of his sincerity and commitment to all of the above. This
study aims to fairly and openly pinpoint the General's post-exile
trend of contradictions between his acts and his words.
A very simple and straightforward comparison between his pre- and
post-exile attitudes and stances makes it very clear, and without a
shred of a doubt, that the man has molted, turned against all his
positions, and accordingly, allied himself with Hezbollah and the
Lebanese agents of Syria in Lebanon. Needless to say that he has
built his leadership and popularity all through the past eighteen
years on fighting all of them, initially militarily, and then
politically.
Six years ago, and while he was still in exile, the General
denounced similar patterns of behavior and accused his opponents of
adopting them for personal
gains, power and status. On 16/06/2000 he said: "The
positions of those afflicted with contradiction between acts and
words cannot be reassuring. Such individuals desire one thing and
its opposite at the same time".
One wonders if General Aoun, who has recently joined forces with the
"Evil Axis" through his alliance with Hezbollah and Syria's agents
in Lebanon, is the same
man who enthusiastically and staunchly sponsored, advocated and
worked hard with the Lebanese lobbyists in the US to prepare,
promote and then pass the "Syria Accountability and Lebanese
Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003". An Act that stipulates: "To
halt Syrian support for terrorism, end its occupation of Lebanon,
stop its development of weapons of mass destruction, cease its
illegal importation of Iraqi oil and illegal shipments of weapons
and other military items to Iraq, and by so doing hold Syria
accountable for the serious international security problems it has
caused in the Middle East, and for other purposes."
One wonders why the US ambassador to Lebanon had to warn Aoun of
'Grave Consequences' over an alliance with Hezbollah, as Naharnet
posted on its Internet site on Friday November 3, 2006: {"Beirut-U.S.
ambassador Jeffrey Feltman has allegedly warned General Michel Aoun
of 'grave consequences' over his alliance with Hezbollah, accusing
the Shiite group of plotting to obliterate Lebanon."Feltman was
quoted as saying: "Hezbollah is constantly working on destroying and
obliterating Lebanon as well as sowing chaos," according to the
Lebanese daily As-Safir. It said his remarks were made during a
visit to Aoun at his house in Rabieh on Thursday. The paper quoted
leading sources in Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) as saying
that Feltman also slammed the so-called "political understanding"
between Aoun and Hezbollah. But Aoun has reiterated his adherence to
the "political understanding," the sources said. They said
that Feltman has indirectly threatened Aoun that his alliance with
Hezbollah would bear "grave consequences on his political future."
As-Safir said that this was
a tortuous reference to the presidency issue, in which Aoun, a
Maronite, is eligible for under the Lebanese constitution. The paper
also said that the FPM has
previously received similar threats from the American administration
warning Aoun against establishing any "material or financial ties
with Hezbollah, or be
blacklisted for assisting terrorists".
Aoun's supporters and followers in the Diaspora and
back home have an obligation, at least towards themselves to
rationally and intelligently question his post-exile new plans,
positions and alliances, and decide if he actually is still the
leader whom they supported as far as platforms, convictions, and
promises.
Below are selected excerpts
from Aoun's documented writings, speeches and interviews that
delineate his pre-exile anti-Hezbollah, anti-terrorism stances.
1) January.3/2005- An excerpt from Aoun's
speech (via the phone) in the inauguration of his party's office in
the Lebanese Northern city of Zgharta:
"We should not compromise on the
country's cause. The cause is not a bet in a race, nor an issue of
trade. It is a matter of existence for everybody (Lebanon's people),
and not the existence of a one segment and not the other. If you
want the country, make it a priority in all your thinking.
Everything else is secondary; this is the salvation. As from today,
we will not accept any loyalty that supersedes that for our country.
We will not accept that all matters be given two meanings and two
specifications, especially the national convictions. We cannot be
with Syria or the Palestinian cause more than we are with ourselves
and with our country. We cannot love the neighbors' children more
than we love our own family members. In our relations with each
other, we should get rid of lying & dodging, as well as of
ambiguity and the every day planting of mines in a bid to improve
and develop our national life, or otherwise we will remain wedged in
ongoing problems."
2) Excerpt from General Aoun's Free Patriotic
Movement Party Parliamentary 2005 electoral platform, "Annex number
one, Hezbollah's issue":
"N
Resolution 1559 and the 'Taef Accord' both stipulate that all
militias (in Lebanon) must be disarmed. This matter raises the
paradox of Hezbollah's military existence. Regardless of different
opinions on Hezbollah's ideological choices and its relations with
Syria, that is suspicious in its intentions towards Lebanon,
Hezbollah's military activities were seen in the UN Resolutions
frame as resistance acts against occupation until the day Israel
withdraw from Lebanon's southern region (May 2000). After the
Israeli withdrawal, legitimacy for Hezbollah' military operations
dissipated. Meanwhile, since then, it created a crisis on national
and international levels. This status put Lebanon in a confrontation
with the international law, while at the same time exerted a threat
to the national unity as it indicates that one group Monopolizes
Lebanon's national decision making process."
Doubts in regards to Hezbollah's actual
objectives and hazards of its strategy are not by any means going to
dissipate through avowed relations with hardliner Iran, or through
its alliance with (Palestinian) Hamas and the Islamic Jihad
movements that are both classified by the West as anti-peace
movements. In this same context, the Shebaa Farms ploy is not a
convincing proof (to justify Hezbollah's military anti Israel Acts)
and it did not succeed in concealing Syrian intentions that hide in
the back. Keenness on the national sovereignty is not one religious
denomination's monopoly and should not be so."
3) January.3/2005-An excerpt
from Aoun's speech (via the phone) in the inauguration of his
party's office in the Lebanese Northern city of Zgharta:
"We hear at times an MP saying that UN Resolution 1559 is an
internationalization for the "Taef Accord". This Accord has no
relation with the UN. It is a tribal
accord forged between the Lebanese themselves and has no execution
mechanism. Where is the Taef Accord execution mechanism? Is it the
withdrawal to the Bekaa Valley? What is the Bekaa fate than? What is
the fate of both regions, the North and the South? If they want to
keep any rifle that is not the one with the
Lebanese army, then where is the State's centrality of security
while Hezbollah keeps holding on to its arms? They invented the
Shebaa Farms tale as an excuse to keep the arms. Why weapons should
remain (with Hezbollah) and nobody says anything? Are all these
things found in the conduct of some opposition figures
or in the majority of the new opposition that lately joined its
ranks? All of this makes us adopt reservations on the topics they
circulate in a bid to attract people. Definitely in the future they
will reach dead ends. You ask them the questions: What after the
Bekaa Valley and when? What is the style that will be implemented in
the Bekaa Valley to make the Syrians leave? And what is the style
that will follow with Hezbollah? When will the country reassume its
security responsibilities? All these questions must be answered. We
are the front opposition and have the right to ask. In 1990 the US
offered Lebanon as a gift for Syria in return for its participation
in the Gulf War. What price will we pay the US in return for its
help?"
4) Quotation from Aoun's (via the phone)
meeting with the Free Patriotic Movement's school students third
annual conference on April 5/2003. Journalist Katia Srour moderated
the dialogue.
*Question by one of the students: The US considers
Hezbollah a terrorist organization. Hezbollah is the son of our
country. What will be our position?
"Aoun's answer: "I had previously invited Hezbollah to a solution. I
am not willing to assume the results for the policies it follows and
for its external ties. I
advised them to abandon the military work and return a political
party, for then we congratulated them on liberating Lebanese land.
But when Hezbollah wants to stand outside the Lebanese framework for
other objectives, we cannot bear the results of its policies.
Then I cannot
engage in a dialogue with Hezbollah while it is carrying the rifle.
Let it put the rifle aside, then we sit down and talk.
I call on
Hezbollah to turn into a political party and we will cooperate with
it. We don't want to eliminate this part, but it too can not enmesh
us; from the Palestinian resistance to the Lebanese resistance, to
others. [As the Lebanese proverb says]: "We brought the bear to our
vineyard and then gave ourselves the credit for pushing it out". And
everything is on our account. Taking out the Palestinian bear,
taking out the Israeli bear, all on our account. To where will we
continue? I don't know."
"If what they (Hezbollah leadership) want are the
Shebaa Farms, they have to get a small paper from the Syrians saying
that these farms are inside Lebanese territory so we can liberate
them. And then there is no need for the canon and the parades. But
if carrying the rifle aims for Hezbollah's hegemony over Lebanon and
if it becomes a Syrian tool for hegemony over Lebanon's decision,
then Hezbollah would have abandoned much of its Lebanese affiliation
and abandoned the fact that it is our brother, because we don't see
him acting like one.
He (Hezbollah) did not have any forgiveness or any understanding
in the southern issue after the Israeli withdrawal.. The result was
thousands of refugees in the south. Why were they treated like this?
Because the State has neglected them for many years and accordingly
they were forced to deal with an imposed status quo".
"We
then, cannot bear the results of a wrong policy when we have been
giving Hezbollah advice from its first days. It is enough for us
that we have postponed the solution in the Southern region since
1994 till year 2000. Today we want to liberate Jerusalem, as if
Jerusalem is Hezbollah's responsibility. There are one billion and
two hundred million Muslims who say Jerusalem is theirs. Let them
step in and liberate it. For us in Lebanon alone to bear
responsibility for this is a matter that is not at all acceptable
anymore. It is a matter that is beyond our capabilities and not a
normal one. Because of this wrong policy, look how many Lebanese
have emigrated and how they are dispersed all over the world, both
Muslims and Christians. We do not consent and support blindly. Let
Hezbollah step in and explain to us its policy."
5) Quotations from Aoun's meeting with NDU
University students on March 26/2002. Journalist and FPM senior
official, Mr. Elias Zoghby (who has now left the FPM) moderated the
dialogue.
"*Question
from one of the students: There is a paradox in the
fear of the Lebanese. They are afraid from the occurring tranquility
in the South that Hezbollah has abided by, because of American
threats (made by Colin Powell, U.S. Secretary of State) and in
accordance to advice from Iran's Foreign Minister Mr. Kharazi. Is
this tranquility a pretext for a new status similar to the one that
prevailed 12 years ago, or it is the tranquility that precedes the
storm?
Aoun's answer:
Today, in the new American policy, America and its allies
would not anymore be satisfied with only a tranquility status. The
Americans want to
dismantle the capabilities of those they classify as terrorists.
Dismantle their action capabilities at the present time and also in
the future. Tranquility is a paralyzing act and will be followed by
dismantling. This tranquility, if not followed by dismantlement,
would not last for long and the status will return to be hot again.
I stress that the importance here lies in the result that we will
reach. We are now one step far from the final phase, and
dismantlement will follow the tranquility.".
"In Lebanon many have dealt with Hezbollah through "Dissimulation" [Taqiyah].
They, within themselves, wish that [Hezbollah] would be attacked,
while in the
open they encourage and command its stances. They push Hezbollah
towards collision. This is a bad and wrong course. Meanwhile when we
call on Hezbollah to abandon weapons and turn into political
practice, we do so because we don't want it to be attacked. Or
otherwise we would have encouraged it on wrongdoing and pushed it as
others do. I said
before and now I will repeat it: A complete divorce with the rifle
should take place in Lebanon internally and externally. There is a
solution for the Middle East, it will be enforced. Why then increase
the losses, and why increase the casualties? Let everybody step in
and go back to their selves under the shade of Lebanese laws and
constitution. Let them go back to their Lebanese status. Do not be
afraid. The tranquility will prolong the current status and
breakdown will occur before such a decision is taken in case there
is one."
6) Quotation from an Arabic editorial written
by Aoun and published on 08/04/2001 under the title "Lebanese
Majority Crushed and an Occupier who Masters Black Humor":
"The national occasion is Lebanese Army Day. We observe the memory,
but we don't celebrate before this army reclaims its normal position
in the country's
life, and before it reclaims the sole military power on its land. An
army that extends its nation's sovereignty on Lebanese soil without
any partners [militias]. An Army that is committed to a liberated
Lebanese regime, free from guilt and inferiority complexes towards
Syria. Up until these righteous circumstances are provided there
will be no festivities, and no talk about sovereignty is acceptable,
specially from those who sold and infringed on all (national) taboos.
7) Quotation from an Arabic editorial written by Aoun and published
on 14/07/2001 under the title: "Syria is Lebanon's Soft Flank":
"Syria has
resisted the Israeli withdrawal (from South Lebanon), but was not
successful in stopping it. with its pressure on Lebanon, it aborted
the implementation of UN Resolution 426. It invented the Shebaa
Farms' case in a bid to keep Lebanon an Israeli soft flank and a
protective zone for Syria. Israel decided to deal militarily with
Hezbollah (the dominant power on Southern Lebanese land) after the
understanding neared its end. Hereupon starts the stage for change
in both game and roles."
8) Quotation from an Arabic editorial written
by Aoun and published on 29/05/2001 under the title: "Continuation
of Blackmailing":
"The bitter reality
that we are sensing today is the transformation of the resistance (Hezbollah)
into a political tool geared by Damascus to create internal (Lebanese
political) equations in a bid to solidify its policies in Lebanon
and support its regime in Syria".
9) Quotations from Aoun's Lecture that was
delivered in France - Lyon on January 3/2001:
A)" For the Lebanese, the Shebaa Farms farce was not
enough to justify the continuation of the military struggle, while
negotiation channels were always open.
This land that Syria has annexed long time ago, and the Israelis
occupied after the 1967 war, was never before an official Lebanese
issue of property claims,
not before nor after 1967. On top of all this, the irrational and
unjustifiable refusal by Lebanese Authorities for the return of
Lebanese sovereignty to
the Southern region has isolated Lebanon politically from the
international community and even from its friends. Those (Friends)
countries were never
convinced with the vague excuses that Syria who controls Lebanon's
decision-making process has produced. As a result Western countries
decided to
freeze their economic aid to South Lebanon as long as the legitimate
Lebanese authorities are not in control of the liberated land (In
may 2000, Israel
unilaterally withdrew its forces from South Lebanon).
B) "The Lebanese had hoped that the end of the military conflict in
South Lebanon would bring back to their country more tranquility,
assurance and trust that could reflect positively on reclaiming
peace and economical prosperity. But Syria has decided otherwise. By
not allowing the Lebanese authorities to reclaim its southern
region, (after the Israeli withdrawal in May 2000), it has dragged
the country back into the same pre-liberation status, and even worse.
The ghost of the Palestinian camps (Syrian sponsored militias)
sharply emerged with full Syrian coordination and became a threat to
stability and a tool in Syrian hands for compromising and
blackmailing. All this has come as a compensation for the weakening
of the Syrians resistance card (Hezbollah) or its loss in the power
balance between them and the Israelis.
C)" We can add up to the national peace illusion, the regional one,
and also the promised coming spring and the wishes for tranquility
that the Lebanese people
have deserved through these last years which were tagged,
erroneously, as the post-war years. Nonetheless, if we do not take
in consideration the Syrian control over the resistance card in
south Lebanon and the motto that became holy in the past, the "Unity
of track and fate" between Syria and Lebanon. This motto that was a
mere maneuver orchestrated by the Syrians to keep holding on to the
resistance card between their teeth and forbid Lebanon from
reclaiming its sovereignty on its southern region through peaceful
negotiations. For the Syrians, this is a very important maneuver
because an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory would expose
the shameful Arab/Syrian withdrawal from the military confrontation
with Israel. The military conflict in south Lebanon has been hiding
primarily the Syrian, and in general the collective Arab, withdrawal
from the military confrontation with Israel.
D) "On May 2000, and in a bid to split the Lebanese Syrian track and
achieve security on its border after failing to reach peace (with
Syria and Lebanon),
Israel withdrew its army from South Lebanon. In the absence of the
whole peace, this new status was supposed to provide a great deal of
tranquility and
stability for the Lebanese Southern citizens in particular. But
instead, and contrary to all their expectations, the Lebanese
harvested disappointment and frustration. The Southern Lebanese
residents of the zone from which Israel withdrew had expected to be
warmly welcomed for returning under the patronage of their Lebanese
state after a long and forced exile, during which the state had left
them facing their fate alone without help or care. But instead, they
sadly discovered the state's hostility and its accusations to them
with treason and treachery. Many of them were hunted and arrested.
What made the humiliation even worse are the practices of the
status quo militias (Hezbollah) who took the state's role. They
interrogated and imprisoned many Southern citizens before handing
them over to the (State's) judicial authorities.
E) "The Southern Lebanese citizens had hoped too that the State's
legitimate authority, as reason and logic dictate, would return to
the land that the Israelis have withdrawn from. But, the Lebanese
state, instead of enforcing back its authority over the liberated
land, bowed to Syria's demands and dictates and refused to deploy
its armed forces there. It handed over the land to the control of
the militias, the only master over the area there since day one of
liberation (May 2000).
"Official statements issued by Hezbollah in regards to its
continuation of the fight up and until the liberation of the Shebaa
Heights that soon translated into reality led to the dissipation of
all hopes for the return of normal status and stability. In the
absence of peace talks that the citizens have been longing for in
the aftermath of an occupation that lasted for quarter of a century,
and because of the frequent counter military attacks (between Israel
and Hezbollah), the Lebanese in general and the southern citizens in
particular, were again preoccupied with fear of a comprehensive war,
and today, they still do.
10) On 17/11/2000, Aoun's wrote:
"The
Syrian regime found its long pursued desire in the Southern
Resistance (Hezbollah). Syria claimed protection for this resistance
in its liberation mission. But in spite of the destructive many wars
waged on Lebanon by Israel in response to the resistance attacks (Hezbollah),
the Syrian Army remained idle".
11) On 03/07/2000, Aoun wrote:
"It is our right to inquire where is this republic (Lebanese
Republic)? Is it in the South that is void from all sovereignty and
its people are moving from the occupation yoke to the party's (Hezbollah)
despotism?"
12) Quotes from an Interview with Aoun
conducted by Journalist Hyam Qusayfi (An-Nahar, 18.1.03):
Q: Are you at all concerned about the impact of a regional war on
Lebanon and its inability to absorb the impending changes?
A: The issue is that the Lebanese depend on the Syrians, in spite
of the latter's faults, to resolve their question. They just don¹t
understand that the Syrians will have to deal with the regional
changes, which in turn will have repercussions on Lebanon. The state
is non-existent and is unable to contain people because the leaders
have no popular base whatsoever they can rely on. The authorities
have starved their people and rule them with forces of repression.
Without the backing of the Syrians, these forces do not have the
backbone to repress people. So if the Syrian presence is suddenly
dismantled, and absent any agreement among the Lebanese for a
substitute, there is bound to be a number of disturbances.
Q: Some are concerned about a convergence of fundamentalist
movements into Lebanon.
A: This is the only thing that I am not worried about.
Fundamentalism is being challenged and confronted globally, and it
can barely protect itself.
Q: So what worries you therefore about the Lebanese situation?
A: Internal chaos. People are lost and feel defeated, and there is
no role model around which to gather. People have become moving
skeletons. Period.
Hezbollah will
cease to exist.
Q: There is talk about a regional deal of which Hezbollah
will pay the price.
A: There won¹t be
any deal over Hezbollah, because a decision has been made to end the
military wing of Hezbollah without trade-offs. It will cease to
exist without any deal.
13) Quote from an editorial
Aoun published On 27/05/2000 under the title "When is the Liberation?"
A) "We wonder if South Lebanon has actually returned
back to Lebanon, and if so under what sovereignty it is now to
justify the joyful drum-beating and
jubilation celebrations?"
B) "What is there
for the Lebanese regime and its deceitful society to be proud of,
when the Israeli withdrawal had forced thousands of innocent
Lebanese citizens to flee out side the country’s borders? Why were
the Southern women scared and the mothers escaped with their
children to the Israeli camps? Is it not because of the threatening
speeches’ uttered towards the Southern residents promising and
voicing revenge and cold blood murder? This blood shedding savage
policy has been hailed and adopted by the regime because of an
apparent inability to assume its security and judiciary
responsibilities".
C) "Under what
jurisdiction the head of the state (President Lahoud) has uttered
rhetoric empty assurances to his scared fleeing people, and how
could he ask them to return to their land and homes? Who would trust
his reassurances when he personally has no say in any of the state’s
affairs, and when his official role has been characterized by an
ongoing shameful phenomenon of abandoning responsibilities and
breaking oaths?"
D) "What delight
is in the triumph liberation festivities when the people of the
liberated land have been forced by the liberators to flee the
country fearing for their lives? The Southern
people have been fighting courageously for the last 25 years,
refusing to abandon the land they worship and the identity they
honor. The successive Lebanese governments have abandoned them for
quarter a century and left them isolated encountering unbearable
circumstances. They are now paying the price of the occupier’s
withdrawal in which they had no say as they have paid previously the
price of the occupation that was forced on them."
E) "The Beirut regime is making the residents of the liberated
territories, who are actually the victims, legally accountable for
the occupation. The heroic
Southern residents who resisted the occupation and refused to leave
their land are now the target of reprisal and savage official
campaign spearheaded by
officials and politicians who were originally responsible for the
occupation of the Southern region and for the pain, destruction,
poverty, displacement, loses and sufferings of all the Lebanese
people since 1975. The free world countries and UN should not allow
this judicial mockery to be inflict on our innocent
patriotic southern people."
F) "In the meantime what we are now witnessing in occupied Lebanon
is a biased, selective, unfair, revenge, double standard and
politicized judiciary".
*End of the editorial
N.B: All quotations listed in this editorial were translated
by the writer from the original Arabic version.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Elias
Bejjani
Chairman for the Canadian Lebanese Coordinating Council (LCCC)
Human Rights activist, journalist & political commentator.
Spokesman for the Canadian Lebanese Human Rights Federation (CLHRF)
E.Mail
phoenicia@hotmail.com
LCCC Web
Site http://www.10452lccc.com
CLHRF Website http://www.clhrf.com
|
