It takes balls
Ok, so what does March 14 have to do now?
They need to move forward, they need to produce some change. They have the momentum, they have popular support, but they haven't done anything about it. And this is very weak from them, and very disappointing.
The way I see it is very simple. Things have been going downhill since Lahoud's term was extended. Things got worse because our president is non-existent on the political and international scene. Moreover, he has given Hizballa the support and protection it needed.
A president is a leader, a role model. We have none.
LAHOUD HAS TO COME DOWN, SIMPLY. Now is the time, now is when everyone is ready to march to Baabda and bring him down. March 14 should have the balls to call for everyone to walk to the presidential palace. What are they afraid of?
INSTEAD, MARCH 8 is taking the initiative and trying to bring the government down. They saw a window of opporunity and they didn't lose it. They hardly waited enough for Gemyal's mourning period to end.
March 14, rise to the expectations. Bring him down.
posted by Paul at 10:38 PM
7 Comments:
paul you have expectations from geagea and joumblat?
if lahoud steps down, then what?
you must know that we have as yet not found any replacement for lahoud (unless you'd be fine with aoun?) so for him to resign now will create more your existing run-of-the-mill chaos.
to be able to put an end to a certain problem you have to present a solution that is readily available
soooo, i've asked this question many times and noone supporting march 14 seems to bother to answer it:
what does march 14 represent?
and what solutions do they, if any, offer?
and last but not least, why are they not ready to engage in more fair elections for a perhaps more just representation of the lebanese people?
democracy should not fear more democracy, i say!
(i promised i wouldn't engage in political discussion w u coz u know how it usually ends but..u know me i couldn't resist)
12:05 AM
what does march 14 represent?
it is demanding that lebanon be freed of any alliance w iran and syria. it is asking that al taef begis to be implemented. it is asking for the reactivation of the 1949 cease fire w israel. it is asking for a better representative election law. it wants a unity cabinet but not where aoun-nasrala-berri have veto power + lahoud while it is them that commands a slight majority in parliament.
the solutions they offer: dialog to solve all pending issues, implementation of al taef accord, an int'l tribunal hoping that it can bring the assassinations to an end, alignment with the west can ease off debt and spark econ revival aqs opposed to syria-iran, that arms and war be a unified decision and not monopolized by sayid el muqawameh and his master mr khamini2i, that armed palestinians no longer are free to roam and do whatever they wish in leb. and finally trasferring 1701 into a solid cease-fire pact based on al taef where shebaa come back to us (if they r ours in the first place, and the leb prisoners are set free).
as for lahoud and him calling all gov't employees to stay home and stop taking orders from their superiors, we hope he initiates this step and stays home and also stops taking orders from his superiors.
and as for going to baabda, paul, be patient, this step will come, but not just yet. as for hope in jeajea and jumblat, we don't have much choice, unless we go with the forces of the '3rd way' ie salim el hoss, dameer libnen, naja7 wakeem, gambling addiction, the communist party (who r more concerned with castro's ailing health), etc. By standing by a political leader at a certain period of time we are not idolizing them, it is a qs f choosing the lesser of evils.
5:20 AM
Paul,
With all respect to your opinion.
DO do not think they can capitalize the momentum because they have no popular support and the Lebanese people are sick of them capitalizing on the death of others. That's why they haven't done anything about it.
8:11 AM
Rouba,
I think, to be fair, there are other people who can be presidents. It is not only Aoun and Lahoud. What about Samir Franjyeh? What about Nassib Lahoud? They are young, motivated and secular/socialist? What about Boutros Harb?
But Lahoud? Is that who you want as a president? He has not done anything for the past few years. He is even telling the employees to rebel and stop working.
As far as March 14, I can't add anything to what meeps just said. ANYTHING IS BETTER THAN NASRALLA.Have you heard his speech on TV the other day? He started by praying for 5 minutes before calling on the demonstration. Do you want someone like him to be in charge? you, who pretends to be secular?
2:27 PM
nasrallah is not maronite, as far as i remember and he will not be president, so no matter how much he prays that's not gonna happen, so that's besides the point.
i agree that we want a govt that engages in dialogue, so, correct me if i wrong, but isn't dialogue usually two-sided and consists of 2 parties willing to meet halfway,or somewhere in between? march 14 style, dialogue is one-sided and unbudgeable, hence it is not dialogue. either their way or the highway, and that's exactly what's happening - the highway. so in an argument, do not take things out of context. (ie HA's action is actually a REACTION to an irremediable situation created by march 14)
i do not see how march 14 are more "secular" than nasrallah/aoun, noone in this govt is secular as far as i know and they are all backed by their own brand of "religion"
i do not see how "alignment" (i like how the word used is "alignment" in a positive connotation kinda way with the 'west' while when it's syria and iran it is "alliance", again, how alignment with the west will solve our problems, seeing as history has proved to us time and time again that the US/its "allies" will always have more interest in israel than in lebanon, and seeing that we still have to deal with the issue of the palestinian refugees, the constant violations from israel of our borders and in our skies, not to mention the recent ravaging destruction which everyone is quick to forget and conveniently forget in arguments, i do not see how alignment with the west will be of ANY help. for the love of god or anything else you believe in, take a look at iraq.
things are not black and white, and do not categorize me to be "pro-syrian" now, i do not want to be occuppied by any foreign power if i can help it; and to reach that stage we need a govt that is REPRESENTATIVE of the ENTIRE lebanese population. you can argue for march 14 from now until apocalypse (which may be approaching) but the crucial fact remains that almost half the lebanese population (shiite/christian mind you) is not being represented gubernatorially, so if we want to avoid war march 14 have to start COMPROMISING and desist from governing by blaming the Other. i believe we need a strong, stable govt at this moment and i am NOT willing to settle for what's there just because it's there (i and more than a third of the populace) think that it is NOT the lesser of the evils, by the way.
if they loved the country so much, why will they not, for the sake of the country, agree to incur elections for a more just representation?
should we throw the shiites into the sea and forget their demands, reducing them all to "following a backwards religious anti-progressive figure blindly like sheep"?
i'm sorry, but when you have such socio-politico-economic problems, you have to find incorporative solutions and not brush them off, for they will come back to haunt you and more.
abt the presidency, paul, you know i would love nassib lahoud to be president, but where is nassib lahoud? he kind of disappeared since the last elections. i am not a fan of the current lahoud, he is weak and puppetty, but with the present monopoly of the govt by hariri/joumblat/geagea, i doubt any president can make any difference at this point. if he goes aginst them he'll be branded 'traitorous' and 'pro-syrian', if he goes with them, well, then why have a president at all. the whole constitution is faulty, and what we're facing now is not due to a lahoud shortcoming(s), it is due to the a)lack of an independant judicial system that would have ensured none of the people dictating power now were roaming about, free
b) lebanese urge to label and categorize and take sides immediately regardless of who they are following and their muddied, murderous, blood-thirsty background
c) ignoring history and the precious lessons that could be learned and applied by taking a look at how our (first) civil war started
anyway, enough, i know no matter how much i write, noone will change their minds or even consider for a second what i'm saying, because of d) lebanese unshakeability (ie convictions) and arguing just for the sake of arguing with noone considering the other's point of view for even a second (i admit before you say it that i may be guilty of the last one too)
8:53 PM
Rouba
I am not ignoring you.
I am recovering.
4:02 PM
choosing to meet half way isn't always a good idea. when u talk about faulty grounds, nations that r always built on compromise don't achieve much. as for who should concede, that qs could go right back at you, namely, how come march 8 r not willing to concede and why is that they r not responding to calls for dialog? is it because they have an underlying motive? if this is HA's reaction, as they put it, to protect syria and the baath, then i can't agree more w march 14 refusing to budge. listing the crimes of the asad's baath could compete with our jewish neighbors' crimes when it comes to their policies on leb. unfortunately, no one can claim being secular due to the system and framework we operate in. but implementation of taef, and a secular state is the spirit of the accord, could pave the way. but for example aoun refuses to acknowledge it and HA have their own takes on it, namely 1949 cease fire accord with israel, hence, oh no, they might no longer be legitimate in holding arms and missiles 'to protect' leb. as for alignment, it could help in that when u look around u and and then look at a map, and realize that leb is not russia, nor a superpower, but a mere finger nail on ur ave map, then alignment with the west could bring stability, and here, it would be useful to cite our neighbors as examples, jordan and egypt. of course, they have many socio-econ problems there, but they do not have israeli warplanes flying over their heads every other day nor do they have guerrillas who are funded and respond to iran and nor do they have political assissinations every other month. of course, iraq is a catastrophe, but as cynical as this might sound, it is still too soon to judge the end result. israel is high on the us adgenda, but if we go back to iraq again, once hailed as the strongest and best equiped army, as soon as political coverage was dropped, it turned into a mess. the point is here directed at sayyid el muqawameh, where if u don't have political coverage along with ur military might, it is not enough to 'protect lebanon'. ie 30,000 tropps between unifil and leb army are a decent enough poltical coverage to 'protect leb. strategically'. as for misrepresentation & the election law of 2000, franjieh and talal arslan are the last to complain, along w HA & AOUN. this law was cut out by ghazi kenaan to suit them (except aoun). the tides have changed and they failed and so they want to change the election law. well, so do the march 14 dudes, but the point is here why does berri overlook parliament and call for 'tashewor' to come up w a new election law. isn't that the role of parliament? and if we r as frangieh wants, to have a law where everybody is represented, then why bother have elections? let's just appoint people and save people the trouble. in 1992, a large portion of the christians were sidelined, maybe now, given that berri and HA (who do not represent all shiites, definitely the majority, but not all) stay stuck up beesho's and khamini's arse may have to be sidelined for progress to happen. in the last german elections, merkel got 51% of the votes (w her coalition). hence, now in germany, 49$ are not represented in cabinet ie power. so where's the big deal? with a new election law, some shiites will be represented and some won't. some maronites will get in to power and some won't. and that is the way it goes. aoun himself would not have swept the jbeil seats had it not been one district with kesrewan. so the law definitely is not perfect, but it is the role of parliament to come up with a new one and paralyzing the country won't help. reverse the situation. let's say march 8 take the majority of parliament seats, so then what happens, saad hariri and jeajea will camp out in the same tents around riad el solh??? in conclusion, can't agree w u more, ruba, over ur last 4 points. we need to implement a system, be it taef or another one altogether for us to get anywhere and this system should definitely take into accounts the lessons learned in history. I can't agree w u more here, because if we go back 36 yrs, the last time the army was in the south, we had the same shit going on. we had the muqawameh, back then the PLO, and kamal jumblat who kept brokering agreements allowing them to be armed. he also had a bunch of puppet organizations sateliting around him (ahzeb wataniyeh) and wanted a new election law, and more say in power and eventually decide who becomes pres. sound familiar? i think nasrallah certainly fits that role today. he is v popular around the arab world because of his role (previously it was jumblat and the PLO) and he seems to want to have a say in everything and has a handful of 'ahzeb wataniyeh' nodding to him. so to reaffirm ur point, y does this happen time and again? history, if read accurately, could teach us many lessons, one which could be that our current system is to blame since it keeps allowing us to go into this labyrinth of an arm wrestling match. so i think until we find a suitable system, i would vote for anarchy until then :)
7:22 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home