John Howard
Vist Tayyar.org Click Here

www.marhabalubnan.org
To Listen to Marhaba Lubnan
the UALM's radio station please
Click Here


OTV
Click Here to Invest in the Future
Click Here


Welcome to the United Australian Lebanese Movement: Guest Editorials

Please review the complete editorial that you requested. Please click here to view more guest editorials.

President Michel Aoun's speech at the "Return of Right" Conference

October 02, 2006

I would like to welcome you all at this meeting that tackles the issue of the displaced in Mount-Lebanon and different Lebanese areas, since the displaced are not only in Mount-Lebanon, even if we allocated this meeting to discuss the displaced in Mount-Lebanon.

Yet, we are thinking of the displaced in other areas as well. Today, we talked about what is existing in Lebanon only, but we have a coming meeting on October 15, when we will be talking about what the case should be and not about the existing situation. And there is a huge difference between the current Lebanon and the one we are looking forward to having. Everybody, under the Lebanese banner, are invited on that occasion, the October 13 anniversary on which many martyrs fell in defense of Lebanon, as the Free Patriotic Movement did not politically exist but it was there intellectually. Hence, the Lebanese flag will be the only banner raised on that day.

Yesterday, we attended an iftar in a very good ambiance, which really represented all categories of the Lebanese society. Along with this scene that expressed coexistence, love and gathering, there is another matter. The Prime Minister spoke and brought up some issues, and I would like to clarify them now. And they are not part of my written speech.
The Prime Minister said that difference in opinion is sacred, and we do not criticize the right to be different. We have fought for this right. And we do not disagree with him or anyone else on the right to be different. Every pluralistic society, be it sectarian or political pluralism, respects and renders the right to be different as sacred. The truth is that we do not share with the Prime Minister the same opinion. There are disputes, the main reason of which is the bad performance of the power in Lebanon, and everybody has to understand this situation. Why are we different? In every state and regime, there are legal references through which power is exercised. Every infringement upon authority every infringement upon power, and every arbitrary decision eliminates the legitimacy of the State and places it in the legitimacy of the mafia. Thus, our dispute is based on the governmental performance which is outside the context of the Constitution and laws and the infringement upon all these references, starting with the composition of the government that took place on the basis of majority and minority. Regardless of the truth about this majority or minority, the regime in Lebanon is based on sectarian consensus. Every two confessions agreeing against a third one could kick it out of power. Is this the legitimacy of power in Lebanon?

No confession shall be excluded as a result of an agreement between two confessions. This is an alarming ongoing defect that places the government outside the context of reconciliatory legitimacy on which the Taif Accord was based. There is a constitutional defect at the heart of the Parliament. Here, I would like to draw the attention of my colleague MPs. How can an observer eliminate an observer, especially that the Constitution prohibits that? Boycotting the President constitutes a breach of the Constitution. There could be no State with "artificial" presidents, even if there is a political dispute. Moreover, the Constitution is violated with the presence of an illegal Interior Minister. Whether we are part of the minority or majority, laws should not be violated as such. Minister Ahmad Fatfat's presence in the Interior Ministry is illegal since he is a "replacement of an attending person" as I named it and not a "replacement of a lost one". His performance at the ministry is illegal as well since he is violating the laws, and the Shura Council has invalidated all the appointment decisions, and he did not respect the rulings of the Shura Council. He established a new information apparatus that is not stipulated by the law and which could not be set up except with a Cabinet decision; yet, it still exists. I wonder at these settlements with an illegal minister. The government's legitimacy has fallen since so long. Hence, there is no difference in opinion and evaluation, but there is a difference regarding illegal and illegitimate practices in power. Nobody shall teach us how to respect the right to be different since we render the right to be different as sacred. Through this right, society progresses and develops, and without it, we will sink in the unilateral intellect-regime, and we are against such thing. Hence, what is said about the marginalization of Christians in power is a voluntary and conscious one, which constitutes wide contradiction in a reconciliatory society. And why go too far in this? Is there a desire to trigger the Christians to call for federalism, while we are fighting hard for unity? Are we after dividing the country? Is it rational that the State continues provoking all of those calling for rectifying the current situation? As for another point raised by the Prime Minister, I would like to reply: "completing the participation through completing the implementation of the Taif?" I would like to ask everyone: was he given the exclusivity to implement the Taif or its implementation takes place via the participation of everybody? These are violations in thinking that result in infringements in execution and prepare a bad atmosphere of the country's unity and political structure. We could shift to the majority or minority regime, but away from the sectarian one. When the bickering gets political regarding political-economic programs and among parties that include different sects, then we could shift from the reconciliatory regime to the majority regime enforced in democratic regimes. However, until we reach this stage that were are seeking and educate our youth about shifting from sectarianism to citizenship, then the Prime Minister, the majority and the minority have to respect the existing regime, abide by it; or else, we would accuse them directly since they are directly seeking confrontation and division.

One year, two months and two days ago, I spoke about the case of the detainees in Syria, refugees in Israel and the case of the displaced who are refugees in their country. With respect to the first one, we called for working hard to liberate the detainees, and the government pledged in its ministerial statement, and not on the dialogue table since it has a committee in charge of this case, to look after it. Time has passed, and we have not seen any work done by the government to release them, and we criticize the Syrian government for linking this issue to the improvement of relations with the Lebanese government. This is a purely humanitarian matter and should not be subject to political considerations. If it truly seeks friendship with the Lebanese people, the Syrian government has to release the remaining detainees alone. We do not know the remaining number it has got, or how many have died in prison or how many did not reach Syria. Thus, it could provide us with some information so that we look for those who did not reach Syria in the collective graves in Lebanon.

As for the refugees in Israel, we have agreed in the Understanding Paper to call on those to come back. One generation of them is learning Hebrew and not their mother language. We called on the innocent to return, as those who fled out of fear and did not commit any crime, could be spared punishment. Moreover, we tried to set a mechanism so that they quickly pass before the judiciary. We considered them as "Abu al-Ainain". Some apparatuses responded to us; however, the government did not respond with us to set a time-table, as it wanted to arrest them again and scare them to prevent them from coming back. This is not what a responsible State, that is keen on its missing people and on those fleeing its land, does, knowing that the border-line file is similar to the file of the displaced, where I requested a parliamentary-judiciary investigation that started in 1975. As everybody knows, any case should reach an end, and we will start investigating ourselves since the State did not give the complete dimension for this request. History cannot be written as it is now since it is counterfeited. We want to write down history with all its facts.

Now, we reach the issue of the displaced. It seems that before convening, the conference achieved many benefits. We were told that the reconciliation took place today, and payments would start on Monday. This is good news. But this topic is complementary, as nothing could change today's conference because it has to do with theft and humiliation that they were subject to. The political return has not been accepted at all, and it is still rejected in the way that it is being carried out. We heard that one or two reconciliations took place. These are not reconciliations. Superficial reconciliations are not reconciliations. Reconciliation should start with a historic self-criticism of the events that took place and resulted from interventions. Moreover, a public and comprehensive apology should be made to victims' families. Reconciliation does not take place by hand-raising, nor does it occur with praying for the souls of the victims. Yet, with public apology, there might be forgiveness. In religions, there is no forgiveness without apology. Even Christ did not forgive one of the two thieves because he did not apologize. We back reconciliation and forgiveness. We consider coexistence as sacred, and we live it fully. However, to reach this stage, souls should be absolved from despise, hatred and pain. We are keen that this historic error is not repeated in the future. There are some bad antecedents. During the war, three things happened; once in Chouf: Damour events, which broke out in the wake of Kamal Bek Jumblatt's assassination. This is in addition to 1983 war, which resulted in the death of more than 3000 people, who were from "Jumblatti" and socialist movement. Kissing and hand-raising in al-Burj square is not enough to make reconciliation come true.

There is another very significant issue. In the collective Christian conscience, a bell has a symbol. A bell is what calls believers for praying. A bell is what calls others to participate in joyful occasions. A bell is what calls others to share sad moments. Most of this sharing does not occur between Christians only. It is for Christians and their friends in villages and everywhere. How can reconciliation take place while we do not know were these symbols are? Were they cannons? Of course not, as bells are a symbol of good relations between people and believers only. Hence, why hasn?t the agreement that was concluded 10 years ago to return these symbols been implemented until now? Why haven?t bells been returned to churches and abbeys?

Finally, I would like to say that the security is not Christian, Druze, Muslim, whether a Sunni or a Shiite. Either that security has to be national Lebanese, or let it not be, since we cannot live in tangent and closed circles because we are afraid of each other. Sewing a relationship with Hizbullah did not cost us anything, and everybody knows the reassurance they are blessed with in places where citizens live, becoming one in this issue. It did not cost us either 1.5 billion USD or half a dollar. Those who went to villages, explained and lectured, paid for gasoline from their own money and not from the State's Treasury. Because it was honest, it entered people's hearts, who were there before us, in terms of gathering, love and harmony.

How will there be a social-security return when one of the leaders in Mount-Lebanon said during elections on June 12, 2005: "If Michel Aoun succeeded in elections, a civil war would break out"? Is this democracy? Is it the State's authority on all the Lebanese territories? They commit errors, apologize and repeat mistakes. Is society an experimental field?

One apologized from his father because he betrayed him and made up with his murderers for 30 years, but did he apologize to those killed as a result of his father's assassination? We are not after stimulating hatred, but we want to find healthy humanitarian terms to deal with all matters. We know how to wash off errors and how to restore bases of life in peace and comfort. There are always good and bad events, but the way we deal with them affects their track. Either it promotes the quality of what is good or vice versa. If we dealt badly, the good will be rendered bad, and the bad would become worse. Based on this, we deal with things and give our remarks. It is time we resort to a social charter, a lifestyle and a prototype of life. If we want to preserve tolerance within our society, we have to respect the other's privacy. If we abolished one another, who will tolerance be with? Between an abolished and an existing entity? Hence, we have to defend tolerance to save it from extermination by some individuals in society. Based on this reality, we called for combating corruption, but no one listened to us. However, today, we presented in public some documents of what happened in the Fund for the Displaced. This is our duty as MPs and as responsible people in society. Therefore, we urge the Lebanese government to refer this file to the judiciary and the State Prosecutor to consider everything in this meeting as a notice. Due to the significance of this file and the following files, we request the government to establish a special tribunal to look into corruption cases, as we will have other meetings to present other files.

The current political situation is not of help to build a nation, if things remained as they are. We have a reconstruction file and many indemnities to pay. What is the cell that helps in development and reconstruction? The municipality. Municipalities have around 800 billion LPs. Let them give municipalities their confiscated funds of the donations that reach 800 billion LPs so that balanced development starts on all Lebanese territories. I will invite municipalities in the future to a meeting on this matter. Today, we are before a very harsh situation among the government, judiciary and opposition. Will the judiciary be independent, competent and honest? This is the practical question the public opinion and all countries in the world are asking. I want to finish my speech with a joke one of them told me and was relayed to a journalist. He told me: "Call for international forces to impose the State's power and make the displaced return."

We hope that this conference be efficient before parliamentarians and officials since what could be mended now may not be mended tomorrow.



Please click here to view more guest editorials.