The Many Lebanons and Bush's Two Kinds of Middle East Democracy: Commenting on the pro-Syrian (and anti-Lebanese opposition) demonstrations in Lebanon, the New York Times said on its website "Today's crowds vastly outnumbered those at recent rallies demanding that Syrian forces leave Lebanon." I wonder if that sentence will make it into the print edition of the Times tomorrow. Lebanese New TV news broadcast this evening (Beirut time) noted the irony that when Bush was making his speech at National Defense University (in which he said "And any who doubt the appeal of freedom in the Middle East can look to Lebanon, where the Lebanese people are demanding a free and independent nation.") Lebanon was witnessing perhaps its biggest demonstration in its history--according to As-Safir among other sources, not only by Hizbullah people (and certainly they are the biggest segment of the crowd, and the biggest political party in the country) but also by sectarian and secular (yes, there are still secular and leftist Arabs) opponents of the opposition. And just as Bush was exploiting developments in Lebanon for his own purposes, the demonstrators in Lebanon were chanting against him. Would his aides tell him that? Or is that part of Blameworthy Democracy? You see for Bush, there are two kinds of Democracy: Praiseworthy Democracy is that which produces pro-US, pro-capitalism crowds. While Blameworthy Democracy (like in Venezuela) is the one that produces anti-Bush forces. The typically shallow US media are now using developments in the Middle East to claim that Bush's doctrine has been validated. It has not. Arab leaders are intimidated by Bush, and are trying to accommodate him, but at the popular level, there is not an iota of change in how people feel about Bush or Israel or the Arab tyrants. I noticed that when Lebanese TV news crews interviewed demonstrators most were Southern Lebanese Shi`ites (you can tell by the accents) but there were also your typical Gucci secular Lebanese too. These are people who for secular or sectarian reasons are fed up with the right-wing hijacking of the sympathy movement that emerged after Hariri's assassination. I also believe that the racism toward, and abuse of, Syrian workers in Lebanon angered many Lebanese. Those Lebanese know that those same demonstrators (and their parents) have a history of racism toward Palestinians, and also toward Shi`ite Lebanese too. My name is secular, and the AbuKhalil family name is shared among Muslims and Christians. When I was growing up, some Lebanese Christians would often assume that I was Christian, and when they realize that my family is Shi`ite from South Lebanon, they would say things like ("but you do not look like Shi`ites" or "you do not act like Shi`ites" etc.) So I know about Lebanese prejudices all too well (also Sunni prejudices against Shi`ites--my mother's family is Sunni). I do not want the footage of the massive demonstrations in Lebanon today to be used to say that Hizbullah speaks for all of Lebanon, just as I do not want the opposition demonstrations to be used to pretend that the right-wing opposition speaks for all of Lebanon. They all speak for all of Lebanon, or more accurately, all of Lebanons. This is the true Lebanon: a deeply divided, fragmented, and disunited country that does not have the foundations of nationhood. Numerically speaking, the opposition itself represents (in Lebanese sectarian and political terms) no more than a 1/3rd (at most) of the Lebanese people. We do not have accurate figures for the size of the sectarian communities in Lebanon (because the Maronite Patriarchate adamantly refuses to update the 1932 census of Lebanon in order to maintain the myth of Maronite majority- Lebanon, or perhaps to postpone facing a painful reality: that those "despised" Shi`ites constitute a very large segment of the population), but it is fair to assume that the Shi`ites alone represent at least 40 percent according to conservative press estimate (I think that if you factor in immigration the Shi`ites are probably between 50-55 % of the Lebanese people inside the country). But who knows. And not all Shi`ites think alike, and not all Maronites think alike. I am for the elimination of sectarian tags and labels altogether in Lebanon. But sectarian and religious leaders from ALL sects would not go for that. I could not believe the smiling and flippant tone of Bush while delivering his remarks today when he was talking about Lebanon. He has no clue. He was talking about American support for the "Lebanese people." Which Lebanese people he had in mind? The ones who were demonstrating against him today? Or even the Third Force movement of Salim Huss who wanted to chart a course that is neither with with the opposition and nor with the government. I am personally for a Fourth Force: I am opposed to all, without exception. A life-long Syrian dissident today asked me about the display of Bashshar's pictures today in the demonstration. He did not like that. I explained by resorting to Patron-Client analysis. In Lebanese (or other) Patron-client relationship, the client uses the patron, just as the Patron uses the client. Similarly, pro-Syrian groups in Lebanon use Syria for their own purposes, just as they are used by Syria. The same applies to the right-wing opposition in their relationship over the years with Israel, Syria, US, and Saddam's Iraq (have you forgotten the honeymoon between Saddam and those right-wing groups that are now leading the Lebanese opposition)? The pictures of Bashshar were displayed just to provoke and just to annoy the other side, although somebody today was telling that there are people who genuinely like Bashshar (I do not get it--just as I do not get any admiration for any Arab leader). I still worry. I still feel that US and France are playing with fire. It takes a very little spark to start civil strife in Lebanon. I wish to conclude with those sobering words about "democracy in the Middle East" from the best magazine there is--politics aside (the Economist): "much of this top-down reform has been hesitant and shallow. In none of these cases has the real balance of power been threatened with change. Essential attributes of an open society, such as full scrutiny of state spending, an unfettered press, truly independent courts and accountable police and security forces remain unachieved. The changes often look less like Mr Bush's forward strategy of freedom than like a rearguard strategy of regime survival."
Oh, and I do not like demonstrations personally. I cannot walk in them. Not only because of claustrophobia, but I cannot join a crowd that may chant a slogan that I may not approve of. Unless you find me a crowd that will adhere to my own standards and slogans, I am not demonstrating anywhere. I did participate in a pro-choice demonstration in DC years ago, but the chants were to my liking. I am now ready to give in, and watch Larry King just to escape the non-stop Hariri hagiographic coverage in Arab media. I am suffocating.