Samir’s In The Mix
What kind of effect will Geagea’s release have on the Lebanese political scene?
Most of the Lebanese commentators have been busy analyzing the meaning of Geagea’s entry to the Lebanese political scene. This is an important issue. After all, Geagea is a Christian heavyweight whose imprisonment was seen by many as a symbol of singling out the Christians as the “bad guys” in the Lebanese war.
His expected Mandella-esque release this week will be a major transformative event in the Lebanese political scene in general, but more specifically, in the Maronite Christian scene. A quick reading in the Beirut dailies this morning indicate that there are three major theories about the effect the born-again Geagea will have: The “Christians will unite and become powerful again theory”, the “Christians will jump at each other throats in a power struggle” theory and finally the “Christians will ally with various partners in Lebanon” theory.
The first theory is a bit idealistic. It can be easily dismissed as wishful thinking. The idea is that the Christian “people” will look around them and see that the other players in Lebanon all have strong and unified leaderships. This is why Samir Geagea will have a historical meeting with Aoun where the two strong Christian camps will “merge” to have their own unified leadership.
The second theory is exaggerated, It’s also a sort of wishful thinking from the pro-Syrian camp. The theory argues that as soon as Geagea is released, he is going to clash with Aoun, because the latter has shown that he is unwilling to share his power and hasn’t kept secret his plans for the presidency.
In fact, the clash will occur, but in a different way. It will be a clash for the hearts-and-minds of Christians, which will be fought through democratic ways, using marketing, plans and Alliances.
Which brings us to the last theory, championed by Annahar’s Sarkis Naoum in yesterday’s column.
The theory goes like this: The Christians will be divided into different camps in terms of their outlook to the future. Some of them will “strategically ally” with various powerful Moslem forces (Like Geagea with Hariri), while keeping a strong level of independence. Some of them will try to establish semi leaderships in the Christian arena (like Michel Aoun), some of them will be independent “moderates” like Butros Harb and now recently Pierre Jmayyel (who seems to have long term presidency objectives).
What does The Beirut Spring think about all of this?
I find what’s going on in the “Moslem scene” in terms of polar leaderships disheartening. I look at what’s going on in the “Christian scene” with a mix of hope and foreboding. Hope because some Christians are the leaders in establishing cross-sectarian/fully democratic parties like Nassib Lahhoud’s Movement for Democratic Change, and foreboding because I sense that the “Christian base” is feeling that it is entitled to play the game of having a strong and powerful leader just like “the others”.
But Instead of the Christians thinking that they should consolidate around one powerful leader like the Moslems are doing, It is the Moslems that should learn from the Christians and establish a “flatter” non-polar system.
The same system that the Christians perceive as a weakness from their side, is in fact a strength for Lebanon
Do you like this post? Would you like to be always updated with new posts on this website? If so, please subscribe to this blog's RSS feed? (tell me more)Share This Post:
Print it: 
Email it: 
-->
Discussion
No comments for “Samir’s In The Mix”
Post a comment
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I blog in The Beirut Spring about Lebanese society and politics. I started in February 2005 after the killing of P.M. Rafik Hariri.
Rss
Latest Posts
More From the Beirutspring network
Lebanese Bloggers
Middle Eastern Bloggers
Today In Lebanon (NOW)
Naharnet RSS Feed
Yalibnan RSS Feed
Latest Lebanese News
RSS Subscribers
Blog Featured In
Categories
Most Emailed
- Kudos To You Mr. President - 2 emails
- Lebanese Bloggers Not Happy With Kuntar Celebrations - 1 emails
- Having It Both Ways.. Literally - 1 emails
- The PR Battle Over Samir Kuntar - 1 emails
- Lebanese Women Will Love Minister Ibrahim Najjar - 1 emails
Nation et négations
Your opinion is the best argument i have ever heard for confessional federalism.
In a confederation,
Non polar systems will flourish in each part of the confederation and each multipolar religious sect will not dread anymore it is smashed by opposite unipolar
This way “The same system that [agiven sect] perceive as a weakness from their side, is in fact a strength for Lebanon [the Lebanese confederation]
And we will live happily ever after.
Please Mustapha, consider this option.
And don’t worry we won’t be needing visas to travel from tripoli to Jounieh, as we don’t to go from NYC to New Jersey
hahaha @ maroon 5. good one
i’d vote no for confessional federalism, and vote yes for the secular state (which requires long-term education and bringing together moslems & christians) but would bear much bigger fruits than federalism
Holding up the ideal of the secular state is a little too out there. Let us look at France, strongly secular state, which is having huge issues integrating and dealing with its large immigrant muslim community. Perhaps if France was not so rigidly secular but valued the diversity of beliefs of its citizens some of these tensions could be avoided. Religion is important in lebanon, and there must be an outlet for it somewhere, somehow. I have no solution, I don’t like the current situation but we are not going to get rid of religious affiliations and beliefs in lebanon so we must work with them somehow
hummbumm,
One solution would be Moslem vs. Christian sports teams. then maybe the Patriach and the Mufti can give us live basketball or football commentary on TV, and politics could then get a breather from the religious stuff. ;)
We already have that it seems in b-ball and soccer (ansar and nejme etc… all have sectarian affiliation, but having religious leaders comment, and predict when or how god will intervene to help the team would be great). As Maradona in 1986 stated it was the hand of god…
To Kellog’s
If a had the choice, i too would have voted “no for confessional federalism, and vote yes for the secular state” as you say.
But it’s a bit dishonest to present the picture as if it was to chose between confessional federalism and a secular state. You know pretty well that the choice is to be done betwenn the statu quo actual failure (1943 pact), a dictatorship a la bashar, and an Islamic republic a la ahmedinajad. Confessional federalism is maybe the best available formula (as Mustapha’s log enlightens)
ah Philipphe please i don’t advocate kellog’s over wheaties and would rather have a tarrantinoesque embracement of all cereal brands (red apple cigarettes for example). all cereals were created equal of course some cereals are more equal than others.
well you’re pretty right, but why isn’t al taif accord working? we’re not on 1943 pact anymore, i say if it’s working don’t fix it.
federalism means more isolation and rifts among groups, i love gemmayzeh str and hamra why do you want them to be parts of different worlds. you may not want it, but this is what federalism will do anyway..just a thought
Many of us would vote for secular over anything anyday. But we have to be realistic. Minorities are prone to fear of persecution and Lebanon is nothing but many minorities bunched up together. Plus, diversity is always good when taken advantage of correctly. We have to work with what we’ve got and Mustapha presents a good arguement. If more people reach across to the other side while maintaining their loyalties to their own groups, we just might find the working formula.
CK