The issue of the network and that of the cameras have been known for a while, and in fact the government itself has mentioned them in the past. To choose to take such decisions on the eve of an announced labor strike, it is as if it wanted to give its opponents a pretext, or as if it wanted to escalate, believing that it could win in such a confrontation.
The events of the last 24 hours have proved that the government has made a mistake. However, these events have shown that Hezbollah (and Amal) have made a bigger mistake than the government: the weapons in the hands of Hezbollah should remain pointed against Israel.
Assaulting the country's public utilities, and, more particularly, the outrageous assault against the government's media is a dark mark in Hezbollah's record. Hassan Nasrallah will never be able, whatever the excuse, to remove the impression that he resorted to violence against a TV station and newspapers, as if he feared what they had to say, or as if to prove the point of the US and Israel that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that cannot be reasoned with.
I say Hezbollah is national liberation movement, but I also say that my support as a normal citizen is, only and always, against Israel. However, no citizen who loves his country and has its best interest at heart can support using weapons inside the country.
Hezbollah's Secretary-General has threatened to cut off the hand of whoever opposes the resistance. It seems that UN Resolution 1701, which closed South Lebanon to Hezbollah, has made it turn towards the inside, towards the weaker side.
If it is I who writes these words, as I have supported Hezbollah and continue to do so, then the party has lost the support of every non-partisan citizen in Lebanon and abroad. How different is the situation today compared to that of summer 2006, when Hassan Nasrallah's pictures were posted in every Arab capital. I have seen them in the alleys of Cairo, and I have seen them being removed and discarded.
More dangerous than all that has been said so far is that the poor attitude of the government and Hezbollah's attitude, which is even worse, have initiated a confessional debate. Mufti Mohammad Rashid Qabbani has said that Sunnis were targeted, while Shiite authorities replied by rejecting "the exclusion of a confession". If such eminent members of the two confessions have begun to insult each other, then what can we expect from the public?
Is the war mentioned by Hassan Nasrallah the coming civil war between Sunnis and Shiites in Lebanon? Does he believe that any side in Lebanon can emerge victorious from such a war?
And then this talk of dialogue, and I mean dialogue about dialogue. Will it be between Nabih Berri and Saad Hariri? Will Michel Aoun be excluded from it or will he remain? Hassan Nasrallah has called for dialogue without conditions, while in the same sentence demanding that the government cancels it decisions. Meaning those decisions, of which the strangest aspect is that the government has taken them while knowing full well that it does not have the means to implement them.
Every country in the world has shown concern for Lebanon and has called for resuming the dialogue between all parties. However, no country in the world, nor the Arab League, nor the UN Security Council, can help Lebanon unless the Lebanese are willing to help each other. I would like to point out another issue here. I do not understand how wise it is for the government to call for help from the Arab League or the Security Council, in other words to internationalize an internal issue. We all know that every internationalized issue has ended in a catastrophe, and Palestine stands as a bloody example.
I once thought that I could stand by the government in running the country, and stand by Hezbollah against Israel. However, the events of this week make me say as clearly as possible that I condemn both the government and the opposition, and I accuse them both of abusing the country.
* Published in the London-based AL-HAYAT on May 10, 2008. |
