ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress
ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Lebanon

NEWS FLASH

Prospects For Syrian Ceasefire Fade | Prospects for the implementation of a U.N. brokered ceasefire in Syria are fading as the Syrian military continues to target civilians. At least 30 people were killed in a military bombardment of al-Latmana, northwest of the city of Hama, including 17 children and eight women. The military has shown no signs of a scheduled army withdrawal from urban areas by Tuesday as violence spilled into Lebanon and Turkey today resulting in the death of four people, including a Lebanese cameraman. State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told Reuters that the Syrian government was trying to “stall for time” by demanding a written guarantee that opposition forces would disarm before it withdraws troops from civilian areas.

Alyssa

The Best Of Anthony Shadid: 20 Great Pieces By 2-Time Pulitzer Middle East Reporter

After the news came last night that New York Times reporter Anthony Shadid had died of an asthma attack in Syriat, I started reading through the archives of his work at the New York Times and Washington Post. Shadid, who ranged widely across the Middle East in his work for several papers, was absolutely wonderful at clearly explaining the dynamics of a given conflict, and what an election, a suicide bombing, or a troop pullout meant.

But what made Shadid’s work most powerful for me was the stories he wrote about about people going on with their lives even under pressure that would be unfathomable, and shattering, to Americans forced to endure it. There was as much moral force to his stories about checkpoints, and shawarma sellers as there was to his portraits and analysis of intractable dictators. And taken together, those pieces demanded that readers recognize that the places Americans only saw as strategic considerations were in fact worlds as full, and rich as their own. Here are 20 great stories from Shadid that captured the changing dynamics of the Middle East, from Iraq’s leaders in self-reflection to the cheery persistance of a Jordanian coffee-seller:

Civil Society: In 2010, Shadid chronicled Iraqi leaders’ profound self-doubt and their reflections about the failure to build a stable regime there. In 2011, he visited a hospital in Libya staffed by volunteers, more than 100 of whom came from overseas to participate in the changes underway in the country. And in 2008, Shadid examined the alternative societies of Jordan’s long-term refugee camps and the hopelessness of the residents’ attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Commerce: During the Egyptian Revolution, Shadid used the death of a prominent member to reflect on the limitations of Egypt’s patronage economy. In 2009, Shadid spent two hours at a shawarma stand in Baghdad run by Bahloul Younes. He analyzed the scene at the Bab al-Yemen market in Sanaa, a city that’s grown from tends of thousands to two million.

Transportation: Shadid bridged the Middle East’s colonial past and its future on the train from Baghdad to Basra. He parsed the desires of Iraqis in the graffiti they left at Baghdad checkpoints. Shadid spent the day with a coffee- and tea-seller who sets up shop on a critical stretch of highway in Jordan. In 2008, he examined the roles that Baghdad’s walls play in the city’s transportation routes and emotional geography. And when the Syrian government denied Shadid a visa after a 2005 story that angered them, Shadid ended up going over water to Lebanon and experiencing the tricky world of Middle Eastern sea transport for himself.

Culture: A month before his death, Shadid checked in on the United Arab Emirates’ commitment to a plan to build three enormous museums. He parsed the cultural artifacts that the U.S. occupation of Iraq would leave behind, from fairytales of American soldiers to the rise of tattoos as a positive cultural marker. Shadid broke down how the controversy over the Dutch newspaper that published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad grew out of control. He visited librarians in Beirut who were committed to making banned and so-called offensive volumes available to their readers, and profiled the editor of Dubai’s al-Arabiya news channel.

Faith: In 2011, Shadid traced the changes in a crowded Egyptian neighborhood once known as the Islamic Republic of Imbaba to explain the role of faith in the Egyptian Revolution—and later looked at how the Muslim Brotherhood was building a base of political support by providing city services. He analyzed how Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi had used threats of an Islamist rising in a Libyan port town to gain Western support, and then explored the town’s balance between the secular and the religious. And he reflected on the role of Arab Christians in a Middle East in the process of dramatically reshaping itself.

NEWS FLASH

Former Top Arab Officials Bolster Qatar Call for Arab League Force In Syria | After the Emir of Qatar called for an Arab League military intervention in Syria, he was bolstered by two former top Arab officials — Amr Moussa, the Egyptian former Arab League secretary-general, and Saad Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister. “The Arab League council will meet very soon to study the issue of replacing the monitoring mission with an Arab military force to separate between the army and civilians,” Moussa told the Lebanese Daily Star newspaper on the sidelines of a conference. “We should not rule out any proposal from the head of an Arab state.” Hariri, in response to a question about the Qatari Emir’s call, tweeted: “I am all for it.” (HT: Adam Makary)

Security

Romney Has Called For Firing Of Public Officials For Far Less Than Ties To War Criminals

Walid Phares

As more information emerges about Mitt Romney’s foreign policy adviser Walid Phares, Romney’s campaign, no doubt, will face increasing scrutiny over their decision to hire the outspoken anti-Muslim advocate. But potentially even more concerning than Phares’ ties to the anti-Muslim far-right in the U.S. are the allegations — outlined in Adam Serwer’s profile of Phares — that the now-Romney adviser was one of the chief ideologists in the Lebanese Forces, a Lebanese Christian militia that committed atrocities during Lebanon’s civil war.

How Romney and his campaign will respond to the newly publicized facts that one of their top foreign policy advisers — indeed a former associate of Phares’ told Serwer that Romney “promised Phares a high-ranking White House job helping craft U.S. policy in the Middle East” — used Christian-sectarian ideology to justify the mass slaughter during the Lebanese civil war.

But Romney has called for the firing of public officials for far less than participating in war atrocities.

Romney said he would fire Obama adviser David Plouffe for comments saying Americans won’t vote based based on the employment rate. Romney said:

If David Plouffe were working for me, I would fire him and then he could experience firsthand the pain of unemployment,”

Romney called upon his GOP rival, Gov. Rick Perry, to “repudiate” anti-Mormon comments made by Perry supporter Dr. Robert Jeffress.

And in a September GOP debate, Romney said that if president he would fire Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke for his failure to resuscitate the U.S. economy. Romney said:

I’d be looking for somebody new. I think Ben Bernanke has overinflated the amount of currency that he’s created. QE 2 did not work, it did not get Americans back to work, it did not get the economy going again … We’re growing now at 1 to 1 and a half percent.

Romney and his campaign have a precedent of considering disagreements over monetary policy and electoral policy to be fire-able offenses. And expressing intolerant sentiments about Mormonism is worthy of “repudiation.”

The Romney campaign appears to accept Phares’ public association with the Islamophobic Clarion Fund and anti-Muslim blogger Robert Spencer. But given Romney’s record of calling for the firing of individuals for far less than ties to a violent militia, will he apply the same standard to Walid Phares?

Security

Top Romney Adviser Tied To Christian Militia That Committed Atrocities In Lebanon’s Civil War

Phares at Lebanese Forces press conference, 1986 (photo obtained by Mother Jones)

When GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney announced his foreign policy advisers earlier this month, one of the names raised some eyebrows among Middle East watchers in Washington: Walid Phares, a self-styled terror expert, who had made the rounds of the burgeoning U.S. anti-Muslim crowd. But an exposé from Mother Jones sheds new light on some of Phares’ older associations with an ideological Lebanese militia implicated in mass slaughter during that country’s civil war.

Phares’ links to the Islamophobic right are no secret. His associates litter the August CAP report “Fear, Inc.,” which described America’s Islamophobia network. Phares has written for David Horowitz‘s website; he sits on the advisory board of the Clarion Fund; and he’s flirted with vague conspiracy theories about Islam with anti-Muslim activist Brigitte Gabriel. The activist was even controversial enough to be removed, under pressure, from the witness list of Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) Homeland Security Committee hearings on domestic radicalization.

But now, Mother Jones’ Adam Serwer has a richly detailed piece about Phares’ past with right-wing Lebanese Christian militias — a political association that goes hand-in-hand with his anti-Muslim sentiments. Phares has played down his long-rumored links to the Lebanese Forces, an umbrella group of sectarian militias, but former associates painted a different picture of Phares’ role as major ideological force in the group. Serwer reports:

According to former colleagues, Phares became one of the group’s chief ideologists, working closely with the Lebanese Forces’ Fifth Bureau, a unit that specialized in psychological warfare.

Régina Sneifer, who served in the Fifth Bureau in 1981 at the age of 18 [...and] now an author in France who wrote a 1995 book detailing her experiences in Lebanon’s civil war, recalls that in his speeches, Phares “justified our fighting against the Muslims by saying we should have our own country, our own state, our own entity, and we have to be separate.” [...]

“[Militia leader Samir Geagea] wanted to change them from a normal militia to a Christian army,” says [Toni] Nissi, Phares’ former associate. “Walid Phares was responsible for training the lead officers in the ideology of the Lebanese Forces.”

With Christian-sectarian ideology underpinning Phares’ opposition to Islam, he was well-suited to the U.S. anti-Muslim movement, and it led to gigs relating to counter-terrorism. He, for a time, ran the “Future of Terrorism” project at the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and has consulted for law enforcement groups. But one former U.S. counter-terror official questioned if Phares’ knowledge was appropriate for the industry: “He’s part of the same movement as Pamela Geller,” the official told Serwer. “He’s viewed as a mainstream scholar of jihadism, but he doesn’t know a lot about the actual movement.”

Phares’ ties to the Romney camp — which is hawkish in the Middle East, especially on Iraq and Iran (an area where another adviser has ties to a controversial, formerly-armed group) — are long standing. Nissi, the sometime associate of Phares’, told Serwer that during the 2008 presidential campaign, Romney “promised Phares a high-ranking White House job helping craft US policy in the Middle East.”

The combination of his ideological past and current anti-Muslim “counter-terror” bent, though, have led to questions about Phares’s motivations. Another Maronite Christian with Lebanese roots, Arab American Institute president James Zogby, wondered about Phares to Serwer: “Is he serving Mitt Romney, or is he serving the politics of a group in Lebanon that was fighting for their sectarian hegemony in a civil war that took over 100,000 lives?”

Security

U.N. Report: Israel Used Disproportionate Force In Nakba Day Clashes

A new United Nations report criticized Israel’s use of disproportionate force in clashes with Palestinian protesters attempting to enter Israel from Lebanon. Seven died and 111 were injured when the Israeli army opened fire on the protesters during their commemoration — known as Nakba Day — of Palestinian dispossession resulting from Israel’s founding in 1948.

While criticizing the Shia Lebanese militia Hezbollah for helping to organize the border demonstration, the U.N. report found that Israel did not take the necessary steps before deploying deadly force against the protesters:

Other than firing initial warning shots, the Israel Defence Forces did not use conventional crowd control methods or any other method than lethal weapons against the demonstrators.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon chimed in with a statement at the end of the report, noting that Israel “used direct live fire against unarmed demonstrators”:

I call on the Israel Defence Forces to refrain from responding with live fire in such situations, except where clearly required in immediate self-defence.

The U.N. said the disproportionate use of force constituted a violation of U.N. Resolution 1701, which ended the summer 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.

After the announcement of the report, Israel reacted with indignation, refusing to officially comment and canceling a planned periodic trip to Israel by the report’s author, U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams.

When asked about Israel’s controversial crowd control methods at the time, a U.S. State Department spokesperson refused to condemn the use of live ammunition against the protesters. (h/t: Mondoweiss)

Security

Cutting Off U.S. Aid To Lebanon Could Have Dangerous Consequences

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Lebanon’s new prime minister, Najib Mikati, announced yesterday that his new government will be dominated by members and allies of Hezbollah. The news has prompted House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) to call for a cut-off of U.S. aid to Lebanon. On Monday, Ros-Lehtinen said:

The U.S. should immediately cut off assistance to the Lebanese government as long as any violent extremist group designated by the US as foreign terrorist organizations participates in it.

While Hezbollah controls most of the country’s south and maintains an armed force, the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) are an under-equipped but nonsectarian institution that has cooperated with the U.N.’s mission in the south. Hezbollah, on the other hand, has received weapons from Iran and serves as a proxy for Iranian and Syrian interests in the region.

It’s unclear at this point how the new Hezbollah-dominated cabinet will govern, but it’s important to note that previous attempts to cut off aid have backfired.

When Congress put a temporary freeze on military aid last August, Iran reportedly stepped in and offered its own military assistance to the LAF. Whether Iran will offer to make up for a cut in U.S. aid if Ros-Lehtinen gets her way remains to be seen. But any steps that weaken the LAF and diminish U.S. influence in Lebanon are bound to strengthen the importance of Hezbollah’s militant wing in Lebanon as well as Iran and Syria’s regional power.

And the State Department isn’t ready to write off the potential gains from military-to-military aid for the Lebanese Armed Forces. A State official in October defended the military assistance as an important tool for strengthening democratic institutions in Lebanon:

US support to Lebanon is part of an international commitment to help strengthen the institutions of the Lebanese state and the ability of the Lebanese government to exercise its sovereignty and authority over all of its territory.

In March, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued for a continuation of U.S. aid to the LAF, telling the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

We worry that if the United States does not continue supporting the Lebanese armed forces, its capabilities will rapidly deteriorate, security in the south and along the border with Israel will be at risk.

The State Department was much slower to pass judgement on the new government. A spokesperson told reporters yesterday that it’s important “that the new Lebanese Government abide by the Lebanese constitution, that it renounce violence, including efforts to extract retribution against former government officials, and lives up to all of its international obligations.”

Yglesias

A Bicameral Solution for Lebanon

Parliament Building, Beirut, Lebanon (wikimedia)

Parliament Building, Beirut, Lebanon (wikimedia)

Pretty much everyone agrees that Lebanon could stand to move to a less sectarian basis for its politics. But at the same time, those who benefit from current arrangements don’t want to change them. What’s needed is a moderate proposal, a compromise that would let confessional elites preserve a lot of their power while also acting to make the country better-governed, thus making their power more worth having. Elias Muhanna offers up the sensible notion of bicameralism as possibly fitting the bill:

It is a system that would seem tailor-made to address the confessional deadlock that has paralysed governance in Lebanon. In Beirut’s bicameral legislature, the Chamber of Deputies would be elected without confessional quotas, while the Senate – with seats divided along confessional lines – would serve as the explicit guarantor of minority rights. Sequestering confessional interests in a dedicated institution would allow the Chamber of Deputies to be transformed from a marketplace of sectarian bartering into the primary locus of political authority whose constituent was the citizen, irrespective of his or her religion.

This seems like a good idea to me. It also casts our own Senate in stark relief. Like Muhanna’s proposed Lebanese Senate, the American Senate was, at the time, a politically useful compromise that allowed something useful to be accomplished. The lack of a workable federal decision-making process was creating a lot of practical problems. At the same time, the absence of a workable federal decision-making process was beneficial to political leaders from small states. Bicameralism, with the people represented in the House and the states-as-such represented in the Senate solved the problem and allowed the country to govern itself better. It did not, however, allow the country to govern itself better than it could have been governed had not the small states blocked a better system. But given the level of sentimental attachment people had to their states at that time, and the states’ tradition of autonomy, and the background of the Revolution and the Articles of Confederation, a better system wasn’t possible.

That, however, was over 200 years ago.

Yglesias

The Obama Effect Abroad

3594694551_d7ea57224c

An incredulous Cliff May offers up what I guess he takes is a reductio ad absurdum argument:

Over on Contentions, Jennifer Rubin notes the column by Eugene Robinson contending that Obama’s Cairo speech led to the encouraging results in Lebanon’s elections.

I wonder: Does Robinson also believe that Obama’s visit to Buchenwald led to the right-wing victories in the European elections?

Look. Obviously the things that Barack Obama says and does are not going to be the main factor in foreign electoral outcomes. But insofar as the relationship with the United States is an important consideration for many countries, then it seems plausible to conjecture that the basic posture of the US President will have some systematic impact. In particular, it seems totally plausible to speculate that a more popular American president who engages with the views of foreigners is going to reduce the appeal of political movements that are skeptical of the United States and increase the appeal of movements that are more friendly to US influence. Both the March 14 Coalition in Lebanon and the European People’s Party fit the “more friendly to US influence” bill.

Yglesias

March 14 Coalition Triumphant in Lebanon

aoun-saidaonline-1

The ruling March 14 Coalition, heirs to the Cedar Revolution, have somewhat unexpectedly carried the day in Lebanon. This is being reported as a defeat for Hezbollah, since Hezbollah was (and is) the main party in the opposition. But Hezbollah’s actual level of electoral support is unchanged. Instead, as I said the other day, the key player was Michael Aoun and his Free Patriotic Movement. Aoun, a Christian, had aligned himself with the Hezbollah-led coalition. But he ultimately wasn’t able to carry enough of the Christian vote to put the opposition in power.

Since the March 14 Coalition is pro-Western in its orientation, this counts as a win for US foreign policy. At the same time, it’s not actually clear to me how anyone’s life in the United States is actually impacted by Lebanese electoral politics and my general sense is that it’s not wise to get too invested in these kind of proxy struggles. The fundamental issue of Hezbollah’s role in Lebanese society will, one suspects, remain unresolved as Hezbollah has no intention of surrendering its weapons and it seems it will still be the case that the Lebanese government isn’t going to be willing or able to forcibly disarm it.

Older

Switch to Mobile