The Lost Moral Compass

An increasingly bleak view is clouding the Lebanese outlook, and as our honorable Lebanese tradition dictates, this is the time we start playing the blame-game.

To the outrage of many Lebanese commentators, the “Shiaa coalition” has decided that an international tribunal is a bad thing for Lebanon, and it has made it very well known. The March-14 people think they know who is to blame: Hezbollah and Amal. They are the ones taking us to the slippery slope towards the unknown, they say. Gang-ho writers are scoffing smugly at how the shiaas are “fighting a lost cause”, but more levelheaded observers acknowledge the extent of their influence and are pleading with them to make the right decisions. (much like that silly hope that Lahhoud will let go of the Presidency on his own)

This is the point where we have to step back and admit that we have made mistakes, and that if anything should be learned for the future, it’s that in politics, principles and convictions do matter.

What started that line of thought in my head was what Issam Abou Jamra, an FPM bigwig, said today on TV.
He told LBC’s Walid Abboud that the PSP’s demand to oust the Lebanese President is a “revolutionary quest”. And that “You can’t have a revolution and compromise at the same time”. To Abu Jamra, Jumblat can’t ask for the president to resign while at the same time being under him in the Lebanese government. Jumblat has to show instead that he truly believes in the revolution even if it were at his own expense.
This statement by Abou Jamra is at the heart of what’s going wrong in Lebanon today. I would suggest we read it again: “You can’t have a revolution and compromise at the same time”. Ni2ta 3al satr.

This rings so true of Hezbollah and Amal today. While many like to say that the March 14 people were right to strike a deal with them on the 2000 elections law, I’m increasingly inclined to find their arguments rubbish. One such argument is that Hezbollah and Amal are the representatives on an important community and that we should have a partnership with them. But how can we know how truly representative they are if we agreed to sign an elections law that inflates their popularity?

How dare we sit and write in our newspapers today how bad Amal and Hezbollah are, if we are the ones who initially helped them get here?

Once the door of compromise has been opened, everything becomes legitimate. When moral clarity is lost, you can only blame yourself for what happens next. The likes of Assem Quanso, Wi’am Wahhab and Sleimen frangiyeh grow guts and start preaching.

An apparently Shiaa blogger was insulted when naharnet referred to Amal and Hezbollah as the “Shia community”. This reminds me of those Americans who say that Bush doesn’t speak for them. Hezbollah and Amal, like Mr. Bush, are the results of free and fair elections. This is why when Mr. Bush declares war on Iraq, all newspapers can safely write: “America declared war on Iraq.”

So before blaming Amal and Hezbollah, we should blame those who lost their moral compass long ago and allowed them to become the legitimate representatives of “the Shiaa community”