Lebanon's New Phase
Randa Takieddine Al-Hayat - 14/05/08//
Is Lebanon now promised a new phase of oppression and the imposition of a single point of view, after the Mustaqbal (Future Movement) media institutions were stormed, as we saw in the last few days? Is this the new phase that the leader of the resistance spoke about? The storming of these media outlets, whatever their nature, was shameful. It was also shameful to see the closure of the airport and the port, which was an instance of revenge against the civilians of Lebanon, just like the storming of the media outlets.
The occupation of Future TV is part of the "new phase," which began with the killing of our two dear colleagues, Samir Kassir and Gebran Tueni, and when our colleague May Chidiac was subjected to an attempted assassination. If the leader of the resistance wants to "cut the hand" of anyone he thinks threatens the resistance, then what was the crime of the journalists at Future TV? What was the crime of the people of Lebanon, who have been deprived of their airport, port, and roads, and the opportunity to live in dignity in the neighborhoods of their city? Is this the new phase in Lebanon? A phase of a single opinion and shutting off free expression, and rendering the Lebanese people the hostage of a single will, prevented from moving freely, and coming and going from their country?
This is not civil disobedience. It has taken the Lebanese people hostage to a single will, and a single opinion, eliminating the other side in Lebanon. Using intimidation, storming institutions, killing and kidnapping have never succeeded. Since the past of the civil war, it has destroyed Lebanon, impoverished it, and destroyed it. However, it has been unable to eliminate the freedom of the press. The Lebanese political system cannot come to resemble the Iranian regime. The Iranian regime suppresses the media, intellectuals, and other opinions; it deprives the people of their country's natural resources. However, the Iranian system cannot be imposed upon Lebanon's pluralism.
It is true that General Michel Aoun has provided political cover that allows this new phase to come to pass. This is particularly because Aoun, ever since he was in exile in France, has always waged battles against any journalist who did not share his opinion. This is Aoun's temperament, which is well-known to our colleagues in the media. He is continually angry, and attacks any journalist who asks a question he does not like.
General Aoun is someone who believes in the school of "one opinion," and a champion of eliminating his political rivals. Thus, he is the perfect partner for this new phase. However, he is completely aware that harming freedoms and imposing a single opinion is a new recipe for losing his supporters and seeing his popularity drop. At times, Aoun launches campaigns against An-Nahar newspaper, because it does good journalistic work and publishes accurate accounts based on his sources. A professional journalist, contrary to what General Aoun believes, does not reveal his sources. General Aoun criticizes objective articles, such as those written by my colleague Ghassan Charbel, the editor-in-chief of Al-Hayat, because he cannot tolerate the opinions of others.
Suppressing the media, silencing free voices, attacking journalists, and depriving innocent civilians of the airport, the port and the freedom of movement are a policy that is rejected in Lebanon. If this is the new phase that they are promising us, this means that they want to do away with Lebanon and its pluralism, forever.
What kind of national resistance searches for the opportunity to kill its own country, and deprive its people of freedoms, taking steps that are similar to what Israel has done in Lebanon? Closing the airport is the kind of barbarous act that Israel has carried out. They are now doing the same thing. What is the crime of someone who leaves, or wants to leave, to pursue his or her work? This is oppression, and not civil disobedience.
If the new phase is one of oppression and taking the people of Lebanon hostage to a single will, and a single opinion, then this is a new hell that they are promising Lebanon and the Lebanese. No one has the right to eliminate the other. The intoxication of achieving a military victory should not turn into taking others hostage and behaving at odds with the popular desire to live a free and dignified life. Let the Lebanese go, open the port and the airport, and treat people as if they are members of the same country. A military victory should be against the enemy, and not against the people of the same country!
|
