Democratic Palestine : 3 (ص 40)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 3 (ص 40)
- المحتوى
-
Lausanne
The Godfathers Block Secular Democratic Reforms
TTT es
Official abrogation of the treaty with ‘Israel’, combined with Syrian efforts to induce stability in Leba-
non, enabled the holding of the Lausanne conference, March 12th-20th. This, however, was not enough
to insure Lebanese national reconciliation. Aside from arranging a ceasefire that temporarily reduced the
level of fighting, the conference adopted no notable decisions. Rather it served to accentuate the depth
of the Lebanese crisis. More than ever it was made apparent that this crisis is internal. Its causes are
deep-rooted political and class contradictions that are constantly being aggravated by the fascist minor-
ity’s insistence on supremacy. Still reeling under the impact of the nationalist forces’ victory in February,
the Lebanese Front leaders were forced to concede the abrogation of the treaty and Lebanon's Arab
identity, including relations with Syria. On the other hand, they redoubled their efforts to maintain their
priviliged position under the false banner of «protecting the Christians».
Cantonization
The main reason for the lack of
results at Lausanne was the Lebanese
Front’s refusal to consider reform of the
Lebanese state, for altering the confes-
sional system would cut into the Maro-
nite bourgeoisie’s power. Instead, hav-
ing again failed to control all of Lebanon,
Pierre Gemayel and Camille Chamoun
proposed a federal system (actually
cantonization). This would allow the fas-
cists’ forces to maintain autonomous
political and military power, as ell as their
alliance with imperialism and Zionism.
Fascist-controlled cantons would be the
counterpart of the Israeli occupation of
the South. Thus, the fascist proposal
denotes complicity in Lebanon's parti-
tion, which the US now tacitly accepts, at
least temporarily, after failure to impose
a «strong central government».
Like the recent reorganization of the
fascist military forces, promoting can-
tonization is the Lebanese Front'’s tactic
for buying time until conditions permit a
new offensive. Pierre Gemayel stated
the Phalangists’ delaying tactics quite
openly prior to the Lausanne confer-
ence, when he said that reform could not
40
be considered until the withdrawal of all
foreign forces. By this he refers primarily
to the Syrian and the remaining Palesti-
nian forces in Lebanon, not to the Israeli
occupation troops. This, rather than the
verbal concessions extracted by the
nationalist victory, indicates the fascists’
real position.
Secularization
The fascists’ cantonization model
was countered by the _ nationalists’
demand for secularization of the
Lebanese state. Without going into
detail about the various modalities
suggested, this was the thrust of the
working papers presented by Nabih
Berri and Walid Jumbiatt, respectively.
Berri in particular highlighted the prog-
ressive content of the proposed reform
by adding the demand for comprehen-
sive social justice through a reconstruc-
tion plan for deprived and war-damaged
areas. He also demanded punishment
for all those responsible for the mas-
sacres and destruction in Beirut’s south-
ern suburbs, the mountains and other
areas, while Jumblatt called for Amin
Gemayel to be prosecuted.
No middle way
The clear contradiction between the
fascist and nationalist proposals left no
room for compromise. Amin Gemayel’s
attempt to pose as the neutral head of
state was rendered impotent. Actually
the contents of his working paper were a
clumsily concealed attempt to preserve
the existing confessional system, show-
ing that he remains the Lebanese
Front’s strawman in power. According to
him, deconfessionalization would only
be enacted in the civil administration,
while the present sectarian imbalance
would remain in all influential posts and
bodies.
Persistent efforts on the part of the
Syrian and Saudi observors to find a
common denominator ran up against the
Lebanese Front’s ultimate refusal of
even an equitable reapportionment of
representation within the existing sys-
tem. Gemayel and Chamoun’s bottom
line was 50-50 Christian-Moslem rep-
resentation in the parliament as
opposed to the present 54-45 division in
favour of the Christians. (No official cen-
sus has been taken in Lebanon for sev-
eral decades, but an unofficial poll taken - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 3
- تاريخ
- مايو ١٩٨٤
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed