By Anthony Letayf
Right of response to Tracy Chamoun’s response to Samir Geagea’s letter to President Obama published in the Daily Star 24 August 2013 by Anthony Letayf, privileged dual citizen of both the United States and Lebanon and Head of the Anthony Letayf Household (which, given its current membership of two persons, may be considered of a similar to size to Ms. Chamoun’s Democratic Liberal Party).
Mr. President, Considering the plethora of issues on your table, another letter (the third in the past three days) from the miniscule country of Lebanon must come as a surprise. That being said, given that you have received a letter from the leader of one of the largest political organizations in Lebanon, and a letter from the “leader” of a “political organization” most Lebanese (let alone United States citizens) have not yet heard of, I figured it would be beneficial to deliver the views of an ordinary Lebanese citizen attempting to help you make sense of the two contradictory letters you received in the past forty-eight hours).
Allow me first to respond to Ms. Chamoun’s vehement attack on Samir Geagea himself (which has no bearing on the situation in Syria and I would have hoped that she would have commented on only pertinent points and saved you some time to focus on relevant issues). Civil war (as evidenced by the current situation in Syria) is an ugly beast. Civil war, unfortunately, necessitates the Machiavellian principle of “the ends justify the means”. This theory was not adopted only by Lebanese leaders (Geagea, Aoun, Jumblat, Berri, Franjieh among others) in the Lebanese civil war but also, by way of example, by Abraham Lincoln throughout the United States civil war, a war that was fought on the premise of upholding human rights (in this case the abolition of slavery) which saw approximately 625,000 Americans die. As Abraham Lincoln most definitely would have preferred to have spared the lives of those who perished, I have no doubt that all Lebanese leaders who participated in the Lebanese civil war would have preferred the same. Therefore, the wartime actions of an individual cannot cancel the same individual’s non-wartime requests for action in the name of humanitarianism. With the exception of the following, this is all the time I will put into commenting on this point: I personally find it deplorable that Ms. Chamoun would utilize the great name of her forefathers in attempt to get you to refrain from acting on the situation in Syria considering the family’s position on the current Syrian regime meddling in Lebanese affairs. It is remarkable how far this particular apple (Ms. Chamoun) has fallen from the tree (the proud Chamoun family). To open my views on more relevant matters, allow me to begin by stating that it worries me to my core that a “leader” of a “political organization” in Lebanon (a woman who is vying for parliament) would be so, at best, mistaken and, at worst, blatantly clueless, as to the current political situation in the Middle East in relation to the United States. I remind Ms. Chamoun that it is not the United States actions in the Middle East that have led to the death of its men and women in uniform but rather incorrect action or incomplete action. This is a distinction that needs to be made. A few, examples of US mistakes in the region that have led to negative public opinion as well as the death of its soldiers and bureaucrats are as follows: (i) Iraq: Regardless of the reasons for entering Iraq, a complete and utter failure in post-war planning. (ii) Algeria: Islamic Salvation Front (a popular political group) wins first round of general elections and is certain to obtain a majority in second round. Army steps in and takes over (with American support). (iii) Soviet War in Afghanistan: After years of pumping money and arms into Afghanistan, US abruptly cease all aid to Afghanistan after the withdrawal of Soviet forces leaving the country in shambles (Note to Ms. Chamoun – those that received arms are the same Jihadists to which you refer in your letter). The point of the above is to show that it is not simply US actions that have had a detrimental effect but rather mistakes in policy. If you won’t take my word for it, take the word of the highly respected, grizzled military and political veteran, John McCain: “There is no policy. And there is no strategy. And therefore we react and we react poorly…One of the best examples is Syria where the president said Bashar al-Assad uses chemical weapons, that’s a red line. He’s used them and we have done virtually nothing in response to that.” As the world’s true superpower the United States has an obligation to act. Mr. President, only by action will you support the Arab populations (and in this specific case, the Syrian people) desire to speak their minds and have a say in how they are governed. Only by action will the United States be supporting confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice.
Only by acting will transparency be established and corruption restricted. The human rights to which you referred to in Cairo in 2009, especially the right to freedom to live as one chooses, will not be respected without US action. That being said, one cannot consider such action in a vacuum from everything else. The United States is still reeling from the deaths of its brave men and women from Libya to Iraq. However, action can be taken while mitigating any loss of life (both US and non-US) (apparently Ms. Chamoun’s knowledge of military strategy rivals only that of her political prowess). Again, if you won’t take my word take that of John McCain: “There would be no boots on the ground…We would use standoff weapons…We would not put a single life at risk.” Mr. President, Ms. Chamoun is delusionary if she believes that the internal Lebanese situation can be resolved in isolation of what is happening in Syria. We are a country divided. The Syrian crisis has grave consequences on Lebanon (the most recent bombings in the southern suburbs of Beirut and Tripoli are a prime example). To summarize, US action in Syria would serve the following three purposes (among others): (i) A cessation to the atrocities currently prevalent in Syria. (ii) A return to relative calm in Lebanon which would afford the Lebanese people the opportunity to attempt to build a sense of national unity. (iii) A role-reversal of US policy in the region which will lead to a thawing of Arab public opinion towards the United States. Inaction by the US is not an option Mr. President.
Who is tracy Chamoun by the way?