Not yet gone

 

LF Head of student affairs Daniel Spiro: “Though its troops have allegedly departed, via its proxies on the inside, continued assassinations and persistent security problems”.

In April 1976, the first Syrian soldier entered Lebanon, and on April 26, 2005, the “last” soldier departed. This weekend, thus, marks the three-year anniversary of the end of almost 30 years of Syrian tutelage.  March 14 activists gathered in various places throughout the city to celebrate the anniversary and to pass out Lebanese flags to passers by.

 

The history of Syrian intervention in Lebanon is protracted and complicated, evoking memories of the civil war and its aftermath.  Recalling the era, however, is relevant in terms of the continued struggle against Syria”s still present influence via its local proxies.

 

The story begins
 
Just one year after Lebanon”s civil war broke out in the spring of 1975, the Kataeb Radio station announced the entry of Syrian soldiers into the country.  Then Syrian President Hafez al-Assad promised that they were there to help keep the peace, to bring a quick close to the civil war.  By October, Syria had officially secured for itself an Arab League mandate to keep 40,000 troops in Lebanon as part of the “Arab Deterrent Force.”  And, so the story began.

 

Twenty-nine years later, in line with UN Security Council Resolution 1559, the Syrian leadership agreed to withdraw its last forces – an estimated 15,000 soldiers. The long hoped for departure came in the aftermath of the February 14, 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and his companions.  On March 14, 2005, over a million Lebanese gathered in the downtown in the Independence Intifada, or Cedar Revolution, to mark the one month anniversary of the killing, shouting, “Syria, Out!”

 

 

Journalist Antoine Saad, the author of Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir”s biography, explained to NOW Lebanon that the Syrian leadership attached itself to the whole apparatus of the Lebanese state after October 13, 1990.  It was on that day that Syrian forces initiated their final offensive against the Lebanese Army led by then Army Commander General Michel Aoun holed up in the presidential palace.

 

In just two years, thanks in large part to the electoral law of 1992, “the Syrian regime had within its stronghold the constitutional authorities, and it had pushed away all political forces that opposed its role in Lebanon.  And in a parliamentary regime, as is well known, parliament is where all other authorities [such as the government and administration] start,” argued Saad.

 

With the memory of Aoun’s Liberation War still fresh, it was the Christian opposition which coalesced first, with several factions vocally objecting to the Syrian backed governments of Omar Karami and Rachid Solh. 

 

According to Saad, this prevented the formation of a national unity government in the early 1990s.  The Syrians therefore pushed through “an appointment package” in 1993 of some 100 civil servants in order to fully secure control of the political bureaucracy.

 

Through the 1990s, Syria continued to tighten its control over its western neighbor by employing similar tactics in public administration and political life.  In 1994, for example, Syrian authorities secured the naturalization of over 200,000 people, most of whom were Syrians, a move which, according to Saad, led to an “increase in influence on the [Lebanese] electoral power, leading to constitutional authority.”

 

Also under this umbrella of general suppression, Murr TV was closed down, Aoun was sent into exile, and even Aoun-adversary and Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea was sent to prison in a dubiously fair trial.  Huge waves of political arrests also took place periodically; the biggest were in 1995, 1998 and 2001. In hindsight, too, many Lebanese believe that the unsolved assassinations of President Rene Moawad and Sunni Grand Mufti Sheikh Hassan Khaled in 1989 might be attributed to elements of the Syrian regime.

 

Syrian control extended into the judicial system, as well as into military and internal security institutions. The army, too, under the command of new Army Commander General Emile Lahoud was oftentimes used as a tool of the regime.  Saad also said that a share of the profits at Casino du Liban was also used as a “financial resource for [Syrian] intelligence operations inside Lebanon.”

 

 

Censorship throughout the years of Syrian tutelage was rampant and imposed by means of the regime”s influence with the General Security. Renowned director Mark Kodeih, for example, shared from personal experience that, “the internal Lebanese security used to closely monitor [artists] under orders from the Syrians.”

 

Kodeih recalled numerous episodes of harassment.  “The Syrians interfered in every detail of my work,” he said.  “I was asked to water down my scripts as a result of my refusal to comply with their demands.”

Kodeih was at one point summoned by Syrian intelligence and interrogated by General Rustom Ghazaleh himself, who at the time was assistant to Syrian intelligence chief General Ghazi Kanaan.  During the interrogation, objections to Kodeih”s play were never actually pinpointed, but Ghazaleh made clear that he knew the names of those close to the director, such as his mother and his wife, in an obvious effort to intimidate him.

 

According to Kodeih, his plays were censored some 14 times by General Security.  And, when the director persisted in showing them at the Monot Theater, the venue was eventually shut down.  Not surprisingly, General Security also canceled Kodeih”s LBC TV show, “Mone”a fi Lubnan,” or “Banned in Lebanon.”

After an arrest warrant was issued against him, and then retracted for “unknown reasons,” Kodeih left for Dubai, where he remained until Syria”s 2005 departure.

 

Even after the Syrian withdrawal, says Kodeih, he still receives phone calls trying to “influence” his work.  “If your employees don”t have red lines, you have to; because if we write about everything that we think, we will be putting ourselves in danger,” he said.

 

General Security is today under the control of pro-opposition General Wafik Jezzini, who recently attempted to ban several plays and films, among them, How Nancy Wished that Everything was an April Fool”s Joke, and Persepolis, moves which were overturned thanks to the efforts of Minister of Culture Tarek Mitri and Minister of the Interior Hassan Sabeh.

 

 

Student activism in Lebanon has long been considered a political barometer of the country”s national political milieu. As such, during Syrian tutelage, student activism of the anti-Syrian opposition was heavily suppressed.  There were, in fact, regular clashes between the ISF, the Lebanese army, and students at universities across the country.

Many students were arrested over the years at the “hands of Syrian intelligence and proxy Lebanese intelligence… on the events of August 9, politicians were watching us receive beatings from members of the intelligence. Then they came out and condemned it…” he recalled.

 

Daniel Spiro, head of the student affairs of the Lebanese Forces both during and after the withdrawal, said that the party has been in a “state of political resistance against Syrian presence… this extended from 1994 from when Geagea was jailed until 2005.”

 

Syrian tutelage took the form of arrests and threats, he said. The party, however, continued to persist with its political “resistance” through university activities, sit-ins, and demonstrations, coordinating with the FPM, the Kataeb and the Free Nationals.

 

At a time when the political and security apparatuses of the country were controlled by Syrian intelligence, students “seized every opportunity to come out as a youth movement set on resisting the Syrian grip.”  However, they often paid the price by being sent for interrogations, where they were blindfolded, handcuffed, or even beaten to the point where they would be forced to sign agreements that they would no longer engage in political activity.

 

Fadi Hanna, the head of student affairs for the Free Patriotic Movement contended that Syria is today still here and that the struggle for liberation now involves “shaking off what”s remaining, which is more difficult.” This struggle entails “democracy, citizenship, and consensus… building one strong, free, sovereign country not affected by Syria or any other country…” He argued that a relationship can be built with Syria, as long as boundaries are marked and the fate of those in Syrian prisons is made known.

 

In conclusion, Spiro says, though its troops have allegedly departed, via its proxies on the inside, continued assassinations and persistent security problems, Syria”s influence is evidently still here. As such, March 14″s struggle against Syrian interference in Lebanon must continue.  The Independence Intifada, it seems, is far from over, and the stakes are just as high as they were in March and April of 2005.