Al-Ahram Weekly | Special

On 13 April 1975 Phalangist gunmen ambushed a busload of Palestinians in Beirut. The incident marked the beginning of a bloody civil war which lasted 15 long years and claimed the lives of 150,000. Since 1990, the Lebanese have been trying to simultaneously come to terms with the legacy of war and to forget. Ironically it was Rafiq Al-Hariri -- whose assassination last February threatened to revive the ghosts of the past -- who had planned to mark the occasion with a series of festivities celebrating Lebanese national unity. This week, Al-Hariri's sister, Bahia, inaugurated the celebrations which her brother had planned. But will Lebanon truly heed the lessons of the war? Serene Assir, in Beirut, seeks answers from some of Lebanon's most prominent past and present players on the political arena

The eldest son of Pierre Gemayel, Amin Gemayel was elected president by the disintegrating Lebanese parliament in a bid to fill the void created by the assassination of his brother, Bashir. One year after being inaugurated into the presidency, he signed a treaty with Israel, an act which he now explains as dictated by the circumstances. He remains politically active, and is rumoured to be contemplating running for the presidency in the as yet unscheduled elections. This interview was conducted in a combination of English and Arabic at his office in the Sin Al-Fil suburb of east Beirut.

I said very clearly from the very start: I will not run for any political official position.

I don't need to be president to play a role. Since the foundation of the Phalange Party in 1936, my father and later on my brother and I, have been on the front line of the different struggles aiming at securing the sovereignty, democracy and liberty of Lebanon. As you know, the party started off by playing a major role against the French mandate... Also during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, the party played a very important role in Lebanon, leading up to the time when I was elected president. You don't need to be president to play a major role in Lebanon. You can still be active in Lebanese politics by taking part in national committees, serving the Lebanese cause, and I'm very comfortable in this position.

The Lebanese cause is one based on democracy, sovereignty, power- sharing and harmonious co- existence among the various factions. We are also struggling for our independence, so that we can play a role in regional and international politics.

This is a point that I would like to stress, since one needs to remember that Lebanon has not been independent for the last four centuries. First we had the Ottoman empire, then the French mandate; Lebanon also faced many threats, such as those during the Gamal Abdel-Nasser era in Egypt, and the Hafez Al-Assad era in Syria. In 1958, there was a drive to force the incorporation of Lebanon into the United Arab Republic, at the expense of Lebanon's independence and sovereignty. Also, Syria has more recently continued to seek to exert a kind of hegemony over Lebanon.

These issues are problematic, but democracy and sovereignty are what grant Lebanon its specificity in the world arena. First, Lebanon is basically the only real democracy in the Arab world; second our constitution was the first in the region; and third we managed to secure our independence in 1943, far before other Arab states did. Hence, our cause depends essentially on the preservation of our role as beacon of democracy and independence.

The Syrian withdrawal is essential for Lebanon and its future. After 30 years of Syrian hegemony, finally international resolutions are being implemented. The Syrians have for too long been imposing pressure on Lebanon; and the real objective of the Syrian presence was not merely to be based in Lebanon for a certain period, but to completely annex Lebanon. The withdrawal of the Syrian army ushers the end of this era.

There are three reasons for that. The first being the erosion of Syrian alliances in Lebanon; the second being United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559; the third and most important being the Lebanese unity which we have been witnessing recently. Huge demonstrations in the downtown area are now calling for the sovereignty of the country, in a strong show of national unity and solidarity.

But can this national unity be preserved once the common aim of these demonstrations is achieved?

We should all struggle to prevent our national institutions from collapsing, and to put Lebanon on the course of modernity and to bring in the good aspects of globalisation. I feel the Lebanese people are ready for this great challenge.

This issue is very complex and multi-dimensional. We need to understand that while on one level, Hizbullah is a national liberation party, which commands a mass following among the Lebanese Shia, and which also plays a major role in Lebanese politics per se. It also resisted Israel in the South, and succeeded in liberating the occupied land. All Lebanese were united behind Hezbollah in this venture. But as the Israeli occupation came to an end with the implementation of Resolution 425, the role of the resistance is over now. Altogether we have to re-assess the role of Hezbollah, as there is no reason for them to keep their arms now. Instead, the Lebanese Army must deploy in the South to safeguard our borders.

But the Lebanese army is small, how could it secure the south Lebanese borders?

That's not true. We have an army of about 60,000. Besides, do you know what enables us to secure our borders? Our respect of international law.

I have to be very clear on that. Don't forget that it was the Palestinian revolution and its slogan of creating a second Hanoi in Lebanon which brought the Israeli occupation in the first place. Don't forget that some observers used to call the South "Fatah-land". It was not because Israel had any claim to Lebanese territory. Israel did not construct settlements in south Lebanon, this shows it had no real expansionist ambitions in that region. The only Israeli concern was security.

For sure. How can you be more royal than the king? If the Palestinian Authority is engaged in a state of permanent negotiations with Israel, why should the Palestinians in Lebanon keep their weapons? There is no reason for that. How can the weapons in the camps in Tripoli, for instance, help in the liberation of Palestine? It's nonsense. They only have them for self-interest. We already provide them with security and the comfort that we can.

From the start we have shared the same democratic principles with the United States. The US is the leader of the free world, and we have always had excellent relations with the free world. We hope they will be improved further. We also have excellent relations with the Arab world. We hope our relations with Syria will improve now, and also with Iraq. I'm very proud that in establishing their own power- sharing democracy, the Iraqis took their inspiration from Lebanon. Lebanon is the real example of power-sharing.

That's an interesting comparison. Looking at Iraq now, which has a Kurdish head of state, I wonder whether this inversion of power would be possible in Lebanon? Although there is no longer any written law dictating that the Lebanese president must be a Christian, there seems to be no space for change, or is there?

There is a consensus among all Lebanese to respect this formula and our political traditions. It is exactly because there is no written rule that this formula works, that this is what the people want. Our traditions are what keep our national system going.

Still going