 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 24 - 30 August 2000 Issue No. 496 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 24 - 30 August 2000 Issue No. 496
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Features Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Lebanese politics "revive" at fever pitch
By Zeina KhodrWith only a few days left before Lebanon's elections, the country, in the words of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, has been turned into a "lunatic asylum." On 27 August, Lebanese citizens will go to the polls for the first of two phases in the country's third parliamentary election since the end of 15-year-long civil war.
No one anywhere in Lebanon seems immune to the upheaval. Candidates have been tossing barbs at each other, politicians have accused state security of interference and partisan bickering, while election-related violence has swept the country.
Residences of deputies have been assaulted with concussion bombs and have been fired upon. Fist fights have broken out between supporters of the two main Shi'ite groups, Amal and Hizbullah. Then, just prior to a visit by former Prime Minister Rafik Al-Hariri to an Armenian neighbourhood, a bomb exploded, resulting in the injury of three civilians.
"These will be the hottest elections in Lebanon's history," wrote Hazem Saghieh, a columnist for the London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat.
At the centre of the maelstrom is the battle between Al-Hariri and Prime Minister Salim Al-Hoss for the premiership. While some observers suggest that support in parliament will be the determining factor in the choice of the next premier, others cite factors such as the backing Al-Hoss still enjoys from President Emile Lahoud. Not only must the next head of government obtain the approval of the main political forces in the country, but he must also be acceptable to Damascus.
The Al-Hariri-Hoss battle is fierce and each has hurled numerous accusations at the other. Their war of words is being aired on the state-run Télé Liban and Al-Hariri's Future Television Network (FTV), prompting many to question the independence of the media.
"The situation is alarming since the state media is taking sides in the polls at a time when it is supposed to be neutral," columnist Charles Ayoub of the Diyar daily wrote.
State television accused the billionaire former premier of financing militias during the civil war so as to be able to make a personal fortune out of reconstruction. FTV ridiculed that charge. Al-Hoss also slammed Al-Hariri -- without mentioning him by name -- for what he characterised as "relentless distortion" of his government's performance during its nine months in office. Added to this, Al-Hoss claims that Al-Hariri is using "vast amounts of money to achieve political ends, thereby marring the democratic process."
But the government, too, has been at the receiving end of heavy criticism from various quarters for its allegedly "undemocratic practices."
MP Emile Nawfal accused the army of "blatant intervention in the Byblos election battle by siding with [his] rival" adding that "some 400 army troops laid siege to my office, ransacking everything."
The army denied the charge and said it would sue Nawfal for defamation. "Troops arrested 50 rioters from both camps [opposition and government supporters] in addition to making 100 arrests earlier in other parts of Lebanon for carrying weapons," an army statement said.
Walid Jumblatt, the head of the Progressive Socialist Party, also accused intelligence agencies, well known for having strong links with Syria, of unnecessary intervention in the elections. "Security agencies were involved in the elections and they should stay away from politics," he said. "I would like to forge ties with the Phalange Party, the outlawed Lebanese Forces and supporters of former exiled army commander General Michel Aoun as well as Christian parties which are opposed to Lebanon's close ties with Syria. I want to revive politics in Lebanon."
The taboo surrounding criticism of ties between Beirut and Damascus was also broken by MP Nassib Lahoud, a prominent Christian opposition politician who called for a "pragmatic examination of Syrian-Lebanese ties to safeguard the interests of both countries, because Lebanon's sovereignty remains incomplete.
"The security and strategic justifications for Syria's military presence must be determined and a time frame for Syria's continued presence made clear," he said. "Syrian involvement in Lebanon's domestic issues creates a political imbalance that some politicians exploit to intimidate others."
Similarly, columnist Sarkis Naoum of the daily An-Nahar said the elections were undemocratic. "In order to maintain its influence over political life, Syria has interfered in the elections, especially in determining the formation of coalition tickets."
Due to Syrian influence on Lebanese affairs, some Christian parties have decided to boycott the elections for the third consecutive time, following boycotts in 1992 and 1996. "We have uttered a resounding 'No' because Lebanon is occupied by Syria and elections under occupation cannot be free and fair," the banned right-wing Lebanese Forces said in a statement. The LF has joined the National Liberal Party, headed by Aoun and Dory Chamoun, in calling on Lebanon's Christians to boycott the polls.
The Maronite Church, however, has come out for the first time in favour of participation. "Boycotting is dangerous. We as Christians should make our presence felt," it said.
One group whose presence will be felt is Hizbullah, which saw its popularity reach new highs following the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in late May. Currently holding nine seats, Hizbullah is expected to win 12 seats this time. "We do not believe our strength derives from the number of seats we win, we know we can get more than 20, but our goal is not to eliminate other groups," Hizbullah deputy Abdullah Kasir told Al-Ahram Weekly.
Hizbullah is not the only Shi'ite party seeking a presence in parliament, however. The Amal Party has joined with Hizbullah in an alliance similar to those forged by the two parties during the last two elections. The aim of this alliance, observers suggest, is to avert tension between the groups, which vie for the leadership of their community.
From Naoum's perspective the alliance between the two Shi'ite parties is not based solely on internal politics. "They are wise to know what Syria wants. They do not want either Hizbullah or Amal to wipe out the other. They do not want one party to become very strong. The policy is one of divide and rule," Naoum explained.
