Arwa has kindly translated my last week's article in Al-Akhbar:
"March 14 Movement and Arab Uprisings: Between Revolution and Wealth
As’ad Abu Khalil
No movement has praised itself as profusely as the March 14 movement: it reminds us of the Soviet Communist Party’s praise of itself during Stalin’s rule. It hasn’t ceased to pride itself and boast of its accomplishments. It’s like George Bush, the movement’s sponsor, who believes he inspired every free popular revolt in the world. March 14’s need for self-praise drives it to put out non-science fiction propaganda. It’s a base built on lies and false claims: like Alsanyura’s insistence that his diplomatic relations and tears suffice to liberate Qaryat Al-Ghajar, Shib’a and Kafar shuba heights, and even the lost district “[Alexandretta] during his free time.
While the Arab world enters an unprecedented, uncharted era, as international Zionism experiences immense horror in the wake of the Egyptian regime’s overthrow, the Hariri movement presents an annual convention that reminds us of Hosni Mubarak’s party’s conferences. If Hariri funds (and the Saud family’s funds) could run out, their lies would be crystal clear. If one could indicate to the Hariri elders that we’re sick of their annual conventions and semi-religious rituals that involve visiting the hideous shrine in the capital’s heart, the propaganda wouldn’t be so blatant. They love life, as they say, and have endured six continuous years of wailing, grieving and crying.
Six years of cheap opportunism capitalizing on the death of Saudi Arabia’s Lebanese representative. If someone could only tell the Hariris that there are some Lebanese who don’t feel distress regarding Rafiq Al-Hariri’s death – this is a truth and it’s about time the world should know it. Some of us want to liberate Valentine’s Day (incidentally, it’s a commercial occasion) of the annual Hariri mourning rituals that have soured the mood for the rest of us. Some doubt (deceptively) that the ill-reputed Hariri was involved in an Israeli conspiracy called Resolution 1559. Sa’d Hariri himself erased all doubt that in Al-Jadid’s leaks. The Hariri family is adamant to turn every Lebanese occasion for joy into an opportunity for grieving and wailing. They strive on grieving, mourning and tragedy alone. This year, the March 14 group came up with a new thesis. They deluded themselves (and who else would believe them) that the “Cedar Revolution’s guards” inspired revolutions in the Arab world and Iran – according to Marwan Hamada, who floated between western capitals with a map of Hizbullah’s telecommunications hoping someone would care (outside Israel of course, since March 14 considers Israel an enemy if asked). It’s merely coincidence that Israel’s friends are March 14’s friends, and Israel’s enemies are March 14’s enemies). Marwan Hamada wants to believe that his alliance with Terry Rhode Larsen and Jeffrey Feltman represents Arab ambitions (let’s not forget Hamada’s praise for the Syrian regime throughout decades, not just years). It appears that the Arab world’s uprisings embarrass this sectarian group. The fall of Zeinulabedin Ben Ali, and Mubarak after him, embarrass a movement that is part of the official Arab establishment, which yields to absolute Saudi control. Awkwardness was the sentiment of the season. They forgot that we remember that one of Husni Mubarak’s last visitors was Amin Al-Gemayyel, who reassured us that Mubarak “supports democracy in Lebanon.” In the March 14 mentality, Mubarak is a beacon of democracy like the house of Saud is a beacon of Arabhood, and like John Bolton is a champion of Arab rights. Iqab Saqr, who repeatedly failed to prove his claims and assumptions throughout endless press conferences last year gave us an innovative idea: Husni Mubarak’s fall was actually an embarrassment to March 8, not March 14, though the tyrant was a major supporter for Iqab Saqr’s team. Saqr’s justification was that the fall of the one-party system harms the opposition, not the Hariri camp. Saqr may be right: he may have meant that the Mubarak regime’s overthrow doesn’t harm groups allied with the regimes of Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain and Oman since they do not recognize any parties whatsoever. Perhaps the prince who invited Saqr to dance at Al-Janadriya had also inspired democracy throughout the Arab world. Saqr returned from Al-Janadriya a democrat, impressed with the multi-party system in Saudi Arabia.
However, much is expected from this group, which afflicts the Lebanese, Syrian and Palestinian people (it is incorrect to assume that Rafiq Hariri’s allies were restricted to the freak of a homeland exclusively). Walid Junblat shot several rounds of bullets into the air to celebrate Mubarak’s demise. But have the Lebanese people forgotten Junblat’s visits to Egypt and praise for Mubarak and the “moderate axis” as he called it? Poor Walid Junblat: the rest of his life will be void of anyone who can trust him. Neither the right or the left trust him: neither March 8 or March 14 will trust him. But for Gizelle Khouri (who still perpetuates the lie that the New York Times gave her the award of best journalist in the Arab world – the story and the award are lies fabricated by the house of Saud’s propaganda machine in the Arab world) to claim and preach to the Egyptian uprising, is more than one can bear. Gizelle Khouri? Who devoted her program “The House of Saud’s Studio” in Prince Azzouz’s station to advocate for Husni Mybarak, his regime, Ahmad Abu Al-Ghait and Egypt’s pro-Israeli policies? Gizelle Khouri relation to Egyptian uprising is akin to Muhammad Dahlan’s (whom she hosted) relation to the resistance. Or like that of Muhammad Abdulhamid Baydoun to integrity and honesty, or like the mufti Qabbani’s relation to meticulous accounting, for example.
As for Fouad Al-Siniora, he’s the first orphan of Husni Mubarak’s removal. No doubt about that. It is true, as newspapers have mentioned that Husbni Mubarak and his intelligence apparatus were very active in the Lebanese arena. Minister Ahmad Abu Al-Ghait (who ordered Egyptian diplomatic missions worldwide to spy on Egyptian communities during the Egyptian uprising, as Al-Shuruq newspaper stated) adopted the Hariri discourse and discussed the rights of Sunis in Lebanon, though he obsessed throughout his years in power about the Zionists’ interests in the Middle East. Exaggerating the Iranian danger was a common concern between two camps that have expressed nothing but hostility towards all anti-Israeli resistance. Like Sa’d Al-Hariri, Al-Siniora was a frequent visitor to the Egyptian government to secure advice, guidance and orders from the tyrant Mubarak. Why does the Hariri camp assume that the archive has been destroyed in their interest? (like Al-Sharq Al-Awsat’s archive, from which previous praise for the Mubarak regime disappeared within one week. The newspaper’s editor had not praised anyone outside the house of Saud as the Mubarak regime). Al-Siniora published on his personal website, one “Sunnis” can be proud of, a statement grieving Husni Mubarak’s regime (the statement then called for civil society in Lebanon).
It is interesting that Al-Siniora referred to Husni Mubarak’s struggle against Israel (that is, about forty years ago. He produced a theory that that crossing the canal was an accomplishment by Husni and Jamal Mubarak together). Here’s the interesting part: Al-Siniora, who was allied with Netanyahu’s solid ally, sees that his Egyptian ally shares his animosity for Israel although Siniora expressed no anti-Israeli sentiments in the last forth years or more. However, why does Siniora choose to delve into ancient history to sing Mubarak’s praises, ignoring decades of allegiance between Mubarak and Israeli aggression, especially during the assault on Gaza? Siniora was at least more honest than the rest of March 14, who almost made Mubarak a March 8 sponsor. We must ask Siniora: was the October 1973 war the reason behind your alliance with Mubarak? Or did something else emerge decades after those wars?
Egypt’s uprising clearly followed the spark of Tunisia’s heroes. That is, the Egyptian youth knew what they were doing. Muhammad Bouazizi was the true inspiration behind the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions, in addition to Khalid Said, not Sa’d or Nadir or Ahmad Al-Hariri, or the ill-reputed Rafiq Al-Hariri, who mean nothing to those who were not on their payroll. The two uprisings’ symbols aren’t the same as the Hariri uprising. More importantly, the Hariri uprising inspired nobody outside the palaces of Qritym, Saud, Nahayan and the doomed Jamal Mubarak. Does anyone in March 14 believe, without the influence of drugs or alcohol, that Samir Ga’ga’, Nasir Al-As’ad, Amin Al-Gemayyel, Solanj Al-Gemayyel and Muhammad Kabbara really inspired anyone for a single moment? The sectarian March 14 movement’s poets were Yahya Jabir, Yousef Bazzi and Nadim Qatish, while the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings were inspired by the poems of Abu Al-Qasim Al-Shabi (who said “I hate palaces and their inhabitants” – why remember only one of his poems?), Ahmad Fouad Najm and Abdulrahman Alanbudi. Hariri newspapers gushed with poems, “epics” and love letters for Rafiq Al-Hariri, yet nobody remembers a single word published. Opportunistic literature about the Hariris and Sauds failed to produce a single memorable poem. The Tunisian uprising, on the other hand, presented a simple yet eloquent slogan: “The people want the downfall of the regime.” The Egyptian people echoed this slogan in their uprising. But in the Hariri movement, masses at the “Bayal” festival chanted “we sacrifice our lives and blood for you, Sa’d.” The Hariri crowd’s favorite slogan is “Sunni blood is boiling with anger.” The difference between the movements’ slogans couldn’t have been starker.
March 14 was based on the wealth of the Hariri and Saud families while the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings were based on everyday people who donated from their own pockets to support revolution. March 14 spent money to attract people to repeated sectarian festivals while the Egyptian people spent blood and sweat to bring about this popular movement.
The Egyptian uprising occurred in the heart of Tahrir Square: it was named after slogans of liberation from colonialism and the Israeli occupations. Abdulmun’im Riyadh’s statue held a special meaning for the people in Egypt. As for March 14, Ziad Al-Himsi meant something to them. The “Al-Mustaqbal” crowd held rallies to support him. March 14’s defense line involved placing all the resistance’s capabilities with Ghassan Al-Jedd (Nihad Al-Mashnouq suddenly demanded disarmament of the resistance. He’d praised it after the July aggression, but he cannot be trusted to settle on a position if it involved a Saudi or Hariri order).
Abdulmun’im Riyad exemplifies a role model of dedication and resistance while March 14 embodies a rejection of resistance and sacrifice (as a matter of fact, Lebanese supporters of Hariri want to sacrifice themselves so the family accumulates more wealth at the expense of the freak of a homeland). Abdulmun’im Riyad had set a plan for the liberation of occupied Arab lands while the Hariri team goes out of its way to prevent any resistance to Israel. Would anyone ask Alsiniora whether his “diplomatic” resistance bore any fruit? What about his tears, which he described as stronger than the rockets of resistance to Israel?
The Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings targeted tyrants that had enjoyed strong US support, which March 14 also enjoys. March 14 was the product of Jeffrey Feltman and John Bolton while the Tunisian and Egyptian peoples’ uprisings struck terror into Israelis’ hearts. Israel was enthusiastic about the March 14 uprising while it worked hard to abort the Egyptian popular uprising. The New York Times published a detailed essay stating that the Saudi king and Netanyahu were Husni Mubarak’s strongest allies. They had applied immense pressure on the Obama administration to protect him, in the interest of Israel’s security. The Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings were based on nepotism and family corruption while March 14, as comrade Khalid Saghiya said this week, has Sa’d Hariri talking about Egypt while “his first cousin is secretary general to his movement; his second cousin is his adviser; his aunt is a candidate on electoral tickets.” March 14 is a cocktail of ruling families who want us to believe that their slogans match those of the youth in Tunisia and Egypt? Are the Hariris’ foreign connections, with the so-called moderate camp, anything but ties to ruling dynasties among which March 14 lost the Mubarak and Bin Ali families? It is strange how the Hariri establishment didn’t remain silent in the fact of Tunisian and Egyptian events although they are embarrassing to them (as Iranian and Syrian repression represent embarrassment to March 8).
The Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings occurred in the wake of organized worker movements (comrade and Egypt expert Joel Benin estimated that about 200,000 Egyptian workers participated in strikes and protests in 2007 alone). On the other hand, the Hariris relied on ex-lefitsts like Muhammad Kashli, to tame the worker movement in Lebanon (it was assisted by the Amal movement, the Nationalist party and the Syrian regime).
The Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings broke out in the names of the hungry, the downtrodden and the oppressed, while the March 14 movement is in the name of billionaires and landowners in Lebanon and oil countries that sponsor the Hariris.
The two uprisings’ foreign policy also contradicts the Husni Mubarak axis to which March 14 belongs. The Tunisian people had barely toppled the Zeinulabidein Ben Ali regime when it chanted “the people want to liberate Palestine.” The Egyptian uprising was also clear in its denunciation of Husni Mubarak’s ties to the US and Israel (despite its focus on domestic matters). March 14 cannot reconcile its essential reliance on Arab tyrannical governments that revolve around the Saudi and Mubarak regimes on one hand, and its attempt to feign support for Arab uprisings on the other.
Of course, this is not limited to March 14. It’s the season for joining the bandwagon of the Arab people’s uprisings. Saudi media supported Husni Mubarak’s regime with enthusiasm and bias. It tried to peddle Husni Mubarak’s theory that the Egyptian uprising was the product of a joint Israeli-Hamas-US-Hezbollah conspiracy. However, the ruling dynasties’ media panicked after Mubarak’s fall in order to garner sympathy from the Arab peoples whom it had worked on humiliating over the years and decades. They resorted to hypocrisy, as if people would forget their previous positions (how can we forget Randa Abul Al-Azm’s coverage of the Egyptian uprising on Prince “Azouz’s” station; she chased after protesters accusing them of housing the “goons”?).
March 14 is connected to Hariri money and cheap sectarian and ideological incitement, which was always a characteristic of the Hariri family’s rise in Lebanon, along with coordination with the Saud family’s plots. The Mubarak regime’s fall has exposed the official Arab regime: it has revealed that Israel is a main, secret member of the Arab League. The Saudi king and Netanyahu used to call the US president daily in attempt to protect the Mubarak regime, which may lead to further strengthening of the gulf states’ relationship to the Israeli enemy (Qatar has recently hosted an Israeli athletic team in a sword fencing contest; the Gulf countries’ connections to Israel are more than warm as per Wikileaks). The Hariri family is a very minor tool in the oil countries’ scheme. The connection between the Hariri medi and Bin Ali’s regime was also very strong. “Al-Mustaqbal’s” broadcasts used to dedicate much space to praising Ben Ali’s regime.
There are some similarities between March 14 and the right wing in the Egyptian uprising. This right-wing sector exists in every popular political movement. Those who confirm for the white man that they are “civilized” – as Wael Ghonem recently told as American newspaper, and those who raise slogans in English in case a white man may notice: those belong to the March 14 crowd. However, the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings are popular movements that were able to topple two regimes that had enjoyed American, European and Israeli support. The Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings challenged tyrants. The Hariri family and those who follow them, are a product of Arab dictatorship. Lebanon’s sectarian system prevented the Hariris from asserting dictatorship despite Hariri Senior’s attempt to quell freedom of expression. However, if March 14 wants to console itself, it may help to remind itself that the Gulf’s dictators are still seated on their thrones. This is great consolation during the difficult times the Hariri team lost its beloved Husni Mubarak. Weep, o Siniora: Husni Mubarak has fallen, and tomorrow you may mourn the loss of another tyrannical ally.
