There were almost more journalists than people in the “say no to war” demonstration

When people started shooting at each other in Tripoli and Tarik el Jdide, the rest of the Lebanese were visibly angry. Residents were clamoring loudly on radio talk shows, on TV stations and on the internet for the insanity to stop. One thing they all had in common was an overriding sense of helplessness, a feeling that there was nothing they could do to stop people from throwing bombs at each other in the middle of an otherwise lively city.

Facebook and Twitter were supposed to change that. The silent majority was finally given tools to organize, gather and stop being so silent. All the peace-loving citizens of Beirut and Tripoli would “reject violence” and “say no to war” in an overwhelming wave of peaceful protests that would shame the fighters into peaceful coexistence.

But the crowds didn’t materialize. People didn’t show up. Not in Tripoli, not in Beirut. In yesterday’s “no to war” event, according to a report by Stephen Dockery for the Daily Star, only 100 person of the 2000 who pledged attendance on Facebook showed up. There were almost more journalists than demonstrators, he sighed.

The online bubble

The Beirut peace gathering (and its Tripoli counterpart) were extreme cases, but they were not isolated incidents. In fact they are part of a recurring theme in the last couple of years: Online activists plan major mobilizations for causes we cyber-warriors believe are universal: Women’s rights, domestic workers’ rights, laic pride, workers’ rights, no to war, no to marital rape, no to sectarianism. We convince ourselves every time that sensible people all over Lebanon will sign up. And not without reason: We get thousands of likes, retweets and forwards, “This time, it will be big!” online backslapping abounds.

But when the moment of truth comes, the actual demonstration is revealed as a shadow of its virtual self. Invariably, we get hundreds (never thousands) of well-meaning middle class, well educated people, most of whom are university students. Nothing to sneeze at for sure, but far from the earth shattering crowds that will change the game. It is instructive to compare the attendance with that in “festivals” organized by political parties.

The Triumph of the political party

In his critique of Lebanon’s Laïque pride movement, Walid el Houry wrote:

The group, like most of civil society movements in the country, both addresses and is composed of middle and upper middle classes (mostly university students and graduates). This fundamental shortfall can explain the group’s failure to incorporate economic demands and an alternative political and economic project that would put forth the interests and speak to the needs of the large segment of Lebanese workers, peasants and unemployed [...] Mobilization requires reaching out to people whose economic situation does not allow them to see secularism as a valid demand

He concludes that real social change requires more than online activists. It requires political parties which offer comprehensive alternative plans. But plans are not the only advantage of political parties. In his critique of Egypt’s Facebook revolutionaries, Francis Fukuyama wrote yesterday:

(the Facebook liberals) could organize protests and demonstrations, and act with often reckless courage to challenge the old regime. But they could not go on to rally around a single candidate, and then engage in the slow, dull, grinding work of organizing a political party that could contest an election, district by district. Political parties exist in order to institutionalize political participation; those who were best at organizing, like the Muslim Brotherhood, have walked off with most of the marbles. Facebook, it seems, produces a sharp, blinding flash in the pan, but it does not generate enough heat over an extended period to warm the house.

In other words, it is one thing to click “Like”, and quite another to follow through to the end and get actual results.

Our moment of disillusionment.

Lebanese online activists continue to hope, but I guess it is time we take a deep look at our shortcomings. If there was something we really need to change, perhaps we should consider forming or joining a political party..

Lebanon doesn’t have a significant bilateral relationship with Pakistan. We don’t typically disagree on foreign policy. The Lebanese do not employ pakistanis as domestic workers. The only explanation I can think of is an Alqaeda style act of terrorism for the sake of terrorism.

Now why would a newspaper close to Hezbollah post such a thinly sourced scare-mongering piece about an upcoming Alqaeda attack? I’m sure it’s a coincidence that there’s an effort in the country to smear the Sunnis as Alqaeda hosts and sympathizers.

A protester burning tires in Verdun, Beirut. (Photo Credit Marwan Assaf for Annahar)

Lebanon’s Sunnis want you to know that they’re angry. Very angry. If a reporter approaches a tire burner today and asks him why he’s angry, she will probably hear these reasons:

• Throughout Lebanon’s history, Lebanon’s popular Sunni leaders from Mufti Hassan Khaled to PM Rafik Hariri were harassed and assassinated because the Alawi regime in Syria feels threatened by powerful Sunnis and their potential effect on Syria’s own Sunnis
• Recently, the most popular Lebanese Sunni leader was pushed out of power and out of the country by Syria’s allies. That happened because Hezbollah (the Shiaas) threatened to use their military advantage (the black shirts incident)
• Lebanese security forces are quietly taking the side of the Syrian regime by arresting and killing Lebanese Sunnis who are supporting the Syrian revolution
• The Sunnis are constantly been smeared as terrorists to justify the heavy handedness with which the government is dealing with them

You can dispute the accuracy of the points above, but there is no doubt in my mind that the angry Sunnis who are burning tires believe every single one of them. I also have no doubt that many of Lebanon’s “normal” Sunnis are sympathetic to their logic (but not to their extreme acts of protest)

A murder in Akkar, and its consequences.

The murder on Sunday of Shaikh Ahmad Abdul Wahid, an outspoken supporter of the Syrian revolution, at a Lebanese army checkpoint was a humiliation too far. It triggered the same pandemonium that took place when PM Saad Hariri was ejected from power: Wherever there are Sunnis in Lebanon, people took to the streets, burned tires, blocked roads and let everyone know that they’re pissed.

But their protests, even if cathartic, are creating three big headaches for their community:

1. They are angering the rest of the Lebanese by inconveniencing them and reminding them of the war. Sunnis are coming across as irresponsible and dangerous.
2. They are not achieving anything. Even if the point was to establish deterrence (to make others think twice before upsetting the Sunnis), it’s not working. It’s just a loud and costly tantrum.
3. They are establishing a reputation that the Sunnis are an excitable bunch that can easily be provoked.

Wasted Energy

The angry Sunnis are playing right into the hands of those who want to create instability in the country to turn the attention away from Syria. Their anger is being wasted on pointless tantrums and they’re displaying an alarming lack of cool-headedness and long-term strategic planning. If they really care about their future as a sect (whether that is a worthwhile aspiration deserves a post of its own), they need to grow some skin, stop burning stuff and start thinking.

A picture spreading on twitter comparing Tripoli to Beirut

It must be very difficult to be a member of the Lebanese Forces nowadays. With all the bearded men and the black flags gaining visibility in Tripoli, it is becoming more and more difficult for them to defend their political alliance with the “terrorists”.

Scary People

Tripoli’s image problem is unfair, but it is real. It is unfair because it is based on an association of bearded religious men with terrorists. But it’s also real because that stereotype is so deep-seated and visceral that even I, a Liberal Sunni, am nervous when I’m around them. How can I blame Christians who find them scary?

The bearded religious Muslim is the Lebanese equivalent of America’s black teenager in a hoodie in a dark alleyway: He is more scary than harmful.

Hug a Salafist

Many Lebanese can’t see Salafists as people with real grievances and rights, but they are. The Salafists are constantly subject to human right abuses, from illegal detentions to random arrests and torture, sometimes solely based on the way they look. Worse, they are often deprived of legal due course. In Salafist eyes the Lebanese government is no better than other Arab governments: A heavy-handed police state.

Members of the middle class in tripoli are shocked to see those men and to realize that they share a city with them. The Salafists, they believe, are tarnishing the image of the entire city. This is why they keep telling everyone who will listen that what they see on TV is not the “real” Tripoli, that Tripoli is not Kandahar, That the Tripoli Marathon will take place and show the real face of the city.

Tripoli, in that sense, is similar to Egypt; the Cairo elite woke up one day and found out that a quarter of the population has voted for scary-looking Salafists.

Assad’s Scarecrow

The Syrian regime is a master at exploiting the fear of bearded men to offer itself as bulwark against them. At a moment of high exposure for the Salafists in Tripoli, they have provoked armed clashes to further strengthen the association in people’s minds between beards and terrorism.

It was a trap for Tripoli, a devilishly effective tactic that plays on people’s fears and gets people to demand the return of the Syrian Army to crush the “terrorists”. Tripoli would do well to avoid falling in that trap, and the rest of the Lebanese should try to look at the situation without judging the city based on some of its inhabitants’ looks.

Update: Rami has a video..

Posters from the “Tripoli Arms free” Facebook page

If I were in Lebanon I would surely join the demonstration for a Tripoli free of arms. If you are in Lebanon, you too should try to join. But there’s an important point that needs to be made: This is very much a middle-class and elite backlash against what they claim is being done by “outsiders” to their city. Unfortunately things are a bit more complicated than that.

The two Tripolis

The people going to that demonstration, my family, my friends, my neighbors, my facebook buddies, these are not the people from Tebbané who are proudly declaring on TV that they’re shooting at the dastardly Allawis. These are not the Islamists who are blocking the roads and burning tires demanding the release of Shadi el Mawlawi. Look at the faces in the ads above. There are no Islamists with beards or veiled women. These are lawyers, teachers, doctors and businessmen, men and women whose lives are being interrupted by the shooting.

Tripoli’s middle classes and elite are geographically separated from the arm-wielding poor and the Islamists, but unlike in Beirut where clashes in Tarik el Jdidé hardly affect life in the other parts of the city, the fights in Tripoli are greatly inconveniencing the rest of its population.

This is becoming a problem for politicians who until recently managed to speak the language of both the Islamist poor on one hand and the elite on the other.  But now, because of the fights, MPs like Abulabed Kabbara whose combattive sectarianism still appeals to the poor are starting to lose their electoral standing with the well heeled. On the other side, “moderates” like Mikati are starting to appeal to the elite but are coming across as impotent to the Sunni warriors and the poor.

The Problem is within Tripoli

What many in the elite don’t realize is that the others are also “the people of Tripoli”. They also vote and they are almost as numerous. Only unlike the middle class, they want arms, they want to “give it to the Shiaas” and they want their Shariaa . These people are not planning to join the “Tripoli free of arms” demonstration anytime soon.

An attractive white girl in a bikini saunters out of a swimming pool and seductively applies sun oil as she lounges. The lifeguard keeps staring and smiling at her, but when she gets a bit too tanned and turns into some horrible black creature, the lifeguard suddenly changes tack: He turns stern, prevents her from swimming and forces her to don a domestic worker’s uniform.

I get the idea for this ad. I really do. That the same girl who attracted the man immediately repulsed him when her color changed, and that is supposed to carry some deep meaning about our flawed human nature. I also understand that this is an attempt at comedy and that it should not be taken seriously. But still, here’s why the ad annoys me:

• An ad about the rights of colored people doesn’t contain a single (real) colored person
• By using sex to sell anti racism, the ad is subconsciously reinforcing the cult of physical appearance that the Lebanese are captive to
• The ad unwittingly reinforces the idea that the Lebanese wouldn’t share a swimming pool with a colored person. The viewer will ask: Couldn’t those anti racism people find actors who are willing to share a swimming pool with a real Srilanki or Ethiopian woman? Is this why they had to paint that actress black?
• The ad has committed the cardinal sin of comedy: You don’t create humor out of the weak party, you always make fun of the powerful. In this ad, the funny character is not supposed to be the “black” girl, it’s supposed to be the lifeguard or the people who are refusing to share the pool with her

I can go on and on. I’m upset because I really like the work of the anti-racism people and I appreciate the effort they’re making to spread the word (and the very fact that they have made a well produced 30-second ad). This critique is not about ill intention or maliciousness. It is one about mediocrity and opportunity lost.

PJMedia doubts the authenticity of AP’s photos of Sunni fighters in Tripoli:

Readers with military experience are probably already laughing at the images, but in case it isn’t obvious to everyone else: The gunmen are purportedly taking cover [...] and firing at an unseen enemy, but right next to them are several unconcerned bystanders who are themselves completely exposed to any return fire, and yet making no effort to hide or seek protection. Instead, many of them are standing around calmly and even laughing and smiling (as are the gunmen in some of the pictures), probably at the ridiculousness of the obviously staged battle.

Now that I’m looking at the photos again, this makes complete sense. But why did the AP photographer stage these images?

Instead of this being an example of fauxtography as political propaganda, it’s more likely in this case that the photographer, Hussein Malla, simply wanted to boost his career and reputation by being the only one to capture exciting battle scenes as they were happening

Or perhaps said Hussein Malla could have a political agenda of his own. I wonder what a scrutiny of his background and political affiliations would reveal.. The stakes are high and the PR war is fierce. Now that I’m thinking of it, why didn’t we get any photos of the Alawi fighters?

If one was to look for an item that unites the Lebanese, a man2oushé is a good place to start. But as popular as the breakfast staple is, there is another object that has continuously witnessed all aspects of Lebanese public life.

From politics, to weddings to modern art, the mighty arguileh established itself as an ultimate cultural icon, an icon that was never camera-shy.

Politics and Activism

In the Last few weeks, we had many events that involved an iconic picture of an Arguileh

The Tripoli clashes

The Jalledib Bridge Protests

Whatever the nature of the protest, the arguileh has always been around. Remember those famous tents in Beirut?

Tent city

On the Road

Speaking of the Jalledib protests, it created one of Lebanon’s largest traffic jams and people got bored out of their minds. Luckily, help was at hand:

Arguileh Delivery

These guys will make sure an arguileh is always a phone call away

If you can’t afford a delivery, you can always share one with your traffic buddies

A treat for all seasons

Winter

..or Summer

Social Events

Sharing a smoke in traffic is just one aspect of the Lebanese bonding over arguilehs. Whenever two or more Lebanese meet, an arguileh is likely to join soon

Courtship

Weddings

Date Nights

Girls night out

Boys day out

House parties

Art and Commerce

Arguiles are not just companions, they’re also the subject matter of artistic expression and commercial enterprise

Photography

Modern Sculpture

Artisanry

Billboards

Posters

… And if everything else fails..

You can always build your own arguileh:

This is by no means a comprehensive list. If you have a classic picture of an arguileh, a picture you believe belongs here, please by all means let me know about it in the comments section..

First, let’s talk about the different words being thrown around: Salafists, Armed Gangs and Terrorists

Salafists:

They look scary. They have scary thoughts and follow an obnoxious ideology that doesn’t believe in Lebanon as a country. BUT, their ideology does not condone a military struggle. In the latest events their chief role is demonstrating and blocking the roads using tires in protest to the way in which one of them was arrested.

Armed Gangs / Militias

Ragtag young men with weapons. They assign themselves causes like protecting their communities from a perceived enemy. Some of them might belong to Salafi groups, but not all of them do. Their motivations are more communitarian (“we want to defend our Sunni/Alawi brothers and sisters”) than religious (“we want to kill infidels”). They are the ones exchanging fire in Bab el Tebbane and Jabal Mohsen at the moment. “Armed gangs” describes both sides of the shooting.

Terrorists and or Alquaeda

A terrorist is someone who intentionally kills civilians, preferably on a large scale, to instill fear. Alquaeda are a higher class of terrorists because their operations are spectacular and involve suicide. You could call both sides of the Tripoli event terrorists if you want, but that would be a loose use of the word, based on the fact that they are shooting indiscriminately at each other without caring if innocent people die. Most importantly though, there is no evidence of any Alquaeda presence.

Why the differentiation is important

When fear is involved, nuance and reason are the first to go. If you see men with beards demonstrating and then you see armed gangs shooting, you are primed to mix it all together and believe the first person who throws the word “Alqaeda” in your face.

What’s important to remember is that there are two sides in this story that are both equally dangerous. They are both equally armed and they are both using heavy weapons: The Sunni armed gangs and some of their Salafi supporters on one hand, and the Allawi armed gangs and their Syrian regime supporters on the other.

What the Syrian regime is trying to do is to say: Look, maybe we are bad, but the others are monsters. They are terrorists. They are Alquaeda. The point of this post is that you shouldn’t fall for that.