Siblings Or Enemies?

The issue of the Lebanese who fled to Israel after the liberation of the south deserves a real and mainstream debate.

It was THE hottest issue in the parliamentary debate, but like in most other issues, it’s being used to score political points, not to find solutions. Too bad. The issue of the Lebanese who fled to Israel is real and needs to be addressed with less shouting and more level-headedness.

The parliamentary showdown had two protagonists: The FPM on one hand, and the Alliance of the so-called Al-khatt-al-kawmi people, represented by Hezbollah, Amal and the PSP. The polarization is so pronounced you can hardly tell that the two parties are talking about the same issue.

To the FPM (and to the secret backers who are not talking because they are represented in the government,) the issue is humanitarian: The “refugees” are Lebanese citizens, said Michel Aoun. They were the victim of the government’s neglect of the south and the Lebanese Army was not sent to protect them after the Liberation, he maintained. This is why they deserve to come back.

But nobody asked the “traitors” to go to Israel and to ask for the enemy’s citizenship, retorted Hezbollah, they should have surrendered to the Lebanese judicial system –which was very lenient with the “agents”, they grumble- Jumblat Echoed that sentiment in yesterday’s AlSafir, and backed it with an aggressive campaign to discredit Aoun in the parliament (see previous article)

“They were scared” insisted M.P. Kannaan from the FPM. “The word they heard from (sayyed) Hassan Nassrallah was that the resistance will come and slither their throats while they’re sleeping”- Nonsense! Answered Naim kassem of Hezbollah, “Sayyed Nassrallah is a great national leader and marja3iyyé wataniyyé (for however you translate that), and he would never say anything like that.

The problem with such a debate is that it’s polarizing the Lebanese people into sectarian stereotypes. Aoun, (and secretly, the LF) are only echoing the sentiments of the Patriarch, who wants the Christians who went to Israel to come back and to be forgiven. The Moslems, on the other hand (including Almustaqbal Newspaper who called them “agents” in this morning’s issue), are intolerant of another far-reaching amnesty.

Some people are finally starting to shape the debate by giving it more substance and less sizzle. Amal’s Ali al Khalil said today that the debate shouldn’t be confessional, and that, in an apparent hint to the Patriarch, contrary to common believe, there are a lot of Shias among the “agents”. He gave the problem a security dimension by saying that Lebanon’s security situation cannot handle another influx of people who have a high probability of being Israeli Agents. The ball is in Michel Aoun’s court to explain how, in case the people came back, they would be sorted between suspects and normal citizens.

The most important thing is that the issue be debated openly among the Lebanese people, through the media, educational institutions and civil society. The a-priori alignments along sectarian lines and the culture of delegating to the leaderships and representatives should be challenged. The politicians have their agendas. We have a country to build.