Ambassador Dr. Hisham Hamdan

No one in Lebanon, not even a baby, knows that the decision in Lebanon was made in America. We made our history, indeed our destiny, by being a bridge between the West and the East since we chose our first constitutional system during the French Mandate in 1926. France was the caring mother until America invaded the international decision, and America became the caring mother to our caring mother.

Yes, we know that America is the decision maker, so don't try to fool us. No one in Lebanon reaches a position of influence without America's approval. In other words, those occupying the three presidencies in Lebanon are made in America. Perhaps the person who has held the second presidency for decades is the most entrenched in American manufacturing. It's no wonder that one American writer says he's America's primary agent in the region. Therefore, it's no wonder he plays a fundamental role in the country's national political process.

We have always been supporters of Lebanon's distinctive model as a civilizational and cultural bridge between East and West. However, we have strongly opposed the transformation of this role since the signing of the Cairo Agreement in 1969, when Lebanon became a bridge for political and military conflict between East and West.

It was not America, nor those who represent the Western face in Lebanon in the role of a civilizational bridge to the East (political Maronites), who chose this role for us, but rather Arabism (revolutionary nationalist Arabism), especially Gamal Abdel Nasser, and those who represent the Eastern face in Lebanon in the game of the civilizational bridge (political Sunnism and leftist movements).

Lebanon paid a heavy price for this transformation. Western cultural and civilizational presence in Lebanon nearly collapsed, and so agents within the pillars of the Eastern Arab revolutionary leadership in the country were forced to play a role. Hafez al-Assad came to us, along with Nabih Berri, and then Walid Jumblatt.

Thus, the Cold War began to play out on our soil, with both tug-of-war and pull-of-war, until the Cold War ended globally and America assumed power. The Taif Agreement was achieved.

We faced the continuation of the Arab-Arab Cold War. The implementation of the Taif Agreement was halted, and Lebanon returned to being an arena for this war's conflicts. The role of proxies was further strengthened, and their numbers increased. Rafik Hariri joined the list of proxies. The period of tension and tug-of-war ended with the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000. However, this coincided with the end of Hafez al-Assad, the most important proxy in the Arab-Arab Cold War game. Iran prevailed. Lebanon's role doubled. In addition to the Arab-Arab Cold War, Lebanon also became the arena for the Arab-Iranian Cold War. Rafik Hariri was killed.

America played its role in settling the Arab-Iranian Cold War by ending the so-called Arab revolutionary nation-state regimes under the banner of the Arab Spring. It is now ending the Arab-Iranian Cold War.

Therefore, the proxy game in Lebanon continues, but within the framework imposed by the process of liquidating the Arab-Iranian Cold War. Accordingly, any talk of change in Lebanon must take this into account.

The signs of the Arab-Iranian Cold War are beginning to emerge strongly. However, it is not over yet, and therefore, the selection of the president and prime minister is linked to this phase. It may be believed that real change in the country has not yet arrived. But what is happening is worrying. This is a critical phase, and we fear it will establish rules that hinder the desired permanent change in the country. The proxies have their interests, and America wants to protect them. We must convince America that its future interests in this country, which has borne woes, lie in restoring the vitality of democracy in Lebanon and ending the power of the proxies.

Any delay in building a Lebanon free from sectarian rule is an impetus for a new civil war, the objective conditions of which may be delayed. But it is bound to come. Such a war will once again weaken the desired American model for the Middle East, the model of lasting peace there. Lasting peace in the Middle East requires a new-faced Lebanon, in which the sectarian Cold War is also resolved and new faces are introduced, not born of the proxies.

The two presidents continue to play the quota game. No wonder they consult Berri on every detail. This is a grave mistake, America. Look for wise people, not proxies or tools for proxies.

The future is not made by an artificial proxy, no matter how powerful, and history is witness to that. Lebanon needs someone who puts Lebanon's interests first, because putting Lebanon's interests first will protect the interests of peace in this region.

Share

Comments

Add your comment