Erhalten Sie Zugang zu diesem und mehr als 300000 Büchern ab EUR 5,99 monatlich.
- Herausgeber: Páginas Editora
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
The book is organized by professors Miguel Mahfoud and André Miatello, containing 16 articles by specialists from Lebanon, Brazil, the United States, Egypt, Italy, and Argentina. Its objective is to contribute to the current international debate on Lebanon's identity as a multicultural and multi-religious coexistence and its resulting state of neutrality, recognized by the local and international community as determining factors in addressing the current economic and political crisis, favoring the leading role of the Land of Cedars in the constant and tense construction of regional and global peace. The authors come from various religious groups that constitute Lebanon's complex society (Christians, Muslims, Druze, etc.) and from different fields of knowledge: History, Law, Philosophy, International Relations, Sociology, Diplomacy, and Education. The articles in the book address key points of Lebanese socio-political identity and role in international relations, including the importance of the recognition of neutrality by the international community as a factor of internal development and international peace. Authors and their nationalities: • Argentina: Sergio Daniel Jalil • Brazil: Rubens Ricupero (interviewed by Miguel Mahfoud), Danny Zahreddine, Youssef Alvarenga Cherem, Igor Pinho dos Santos, Guilherme Di Lorenzo Pires, André Miatello • Egypt: Mateus Domingues da Silva • Egypt/Italy: Wael Farouq • United States: Hussein Kalout • Lebanon: Bechara Raï, Elie Elias, Marie Fayad, Lina Abou Naoum, Louis Wehbé • Italy: Michele Zanzucchi To purchase from outside of Brazil, please send a message to [email protected].
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 375
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023
Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:
Ähnliche
TEXT: ©The authors
EDITING: Cláudia Rezende
PROOFREADING: Ísis De Vitta
COVER, GRAPHIC DESIGN, AND LAYOUT: Letícia Ribeiro Ianhez
Dados Internacionais de Catalogação na Publicação (CIP) (Câmara Brasileira do Livro, SP, Brasil)
Coexistence as identity [livro eletrônico] : the neutrality of Lebanon / organização Miguel Mahfoud, André Miatello. -- Belo Horizonte, MG : Páginas Editora, 2023.
ePub
Vários autores.
ISBN 978-65-5079-307-4
1. Geopolítica 2. Líbano - História 3. ManifestoI. Mahfoud, Miguel. II. Miatello, André.
23-165350 CDD-327.101
Índices para catálogo sistemático:
1. Geopolítica : Relações internacionais : Ciência política 327.101
Tábata Alves da Silva - Bibliotecária - CRB-8/9253
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used, reproduced, or stored, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the authors.
Belo Horizonte — 2023 — 1st edition.
www.paginaseditora.com.br
Miguel Mahfoud
André Miatello
(Editors)
Béchara Boutros Card. Raï
Danny Zahreddine
Elie Tony Elias
Guilherme Di Lorenzo Pires
Igor Pinho dos Santos
Lina Abou Naoum
Louis Wehbé
Marie Fayad
Mateus Domingues da Silva
Michele Zanzucchi
Rubens Ricupero
Sergio Daniel Jalil
Wael Farouq
Youssef Alvarenga Cherem
Summary
Preface
Carla Jazzar
Ambassador of Lebanon to Brazil
The idea of neutrality of Lebanon is a recurrent theme that emerges every time the country is drawn into political, religious, ideological and military alignment with regional axis, as our recent history has witnessed. Though enshrined in the 1943 national covenant that laid the foundations of modern Lebanon, neutrality is yet to be codified into the constitution as it remains a subject of great polarization amongst the various Lebanese components. While it is considered by some, as a guarantee for the independence, security and stability of the country, it represents, for others, a call for isolationism and divorce from our natural geopolitical environment.
Today, with the severe institutional paralysis in Lebanon; the repetitive prolonged vacancies at the head of the executive; the unprecedented devastating financial, economic and social crisis; the sheer exposure of the country to all kind of foreign interferences and regional alignments, the debate over neutrality has resurfaced with great intensity. Actually, in front of this unfortunate scene, it becomes all the more legitimate to question the sustainability of the current Lebanese system, and to put forward new constitutional proposals that guarantee the sole interests of the country, its independence, its peace, stability and prosperity. And neutrality is amongst those many proposals.
However, can Lebanon reach this impossible dream with its deeply differing visions over its cultural and socio-political identity? Is it realistic knowing the complexity of this process and the impact of the various internal and external factors may have on it?
Neutrality is typically a voluntary choice made by a country rather than something that can be imposed by an external entity like the United Nations. It involves public and political support of all domestic components, as well as approval of all relevant legislative and executive bodies. It also entails reviewing domestic laws and constitution, as well as international engagements so as to make them compatible with the commitment to neutrality.
Is Lebanon ready for that? The question remains open… Ultimately, it’s up to the Lebanese themselves, and only to the Lebanese, to decide, together, their way ahead; whether to pursue the path of neutrality or to choose any other form of constitutional arrangements.
No matter what the Lebanese choice might be, I’d like to express my deepest gratitude to professors Miguel Mahfoud e Andre Miatello for organizing this book and compiling articles of great relevance written by various specialists from different cultural, educational, sociological and geographical backgrounds. This book represents a major contribution to the national and international debate over Lebanon’s future choices. And above all, it is a plea for a serious thought on the forthcoming role of Lebanon in the regional and international arenas, as a model of pacific coexistence and a message of peace and stability.
Manifesto in Support of Lebanese Neutrality
We, the authors of this book “Coexistence as identity: the neutrality of Lebanon”, stand in solidarity with the Lebanese people in their demand for neutrality. We believe that Lebanon, as a multicultural society, has suffered enough from years of conflict and violence, and it is time for the country to embark on a new path towards peace and stability.
The demand for neutrality is a call for Lebanon to remain free from external interference and influence, and to pursue a foreign policy based on the principles of non-alignment, cooperation, and respect for international law. It is a demand for the Lebanese people to have the right to determine their destiny without the pressure of foreign powers.
As a multicultural society, Lebanon faces unique challenges that can only be addressed through a policy of neutrality. Neutrality will preserve Lebanon’s cultural and religious diversity by ensuring that all communities are treated fairly, and their voices are heard without bias. Neutrality will also strengthen national unity and reduce tensions between communities.
Lebanon has long been a battleground for regional and international powers, with devastating consequences for the country and its people. The Lebanese people have suffered from the consequences of proxy wars, terrorism, and sectarian violence. They have endured the economic and social costs of instability, corruption, and mismanagement. It is time to put an end to this cycle of violence and seek a new path towards a better future.
The demand for neutrality is neither an isolationist policy nor a sign of weakness. On the contrary, it is a courageous step towards independence, sovereignty, and peace. Neutrality does not mean Lebanon will turn its back on its neighbors or the international community and most particularly the Arab league. It means Lebanon will engage in constructive dialogue, cooperation, and diplomacy based on mutual respect and common interests. It means Lebanon will not be used as a pawn in the geopolitical games of other countries.
The demand for neutrality is a call for a new social contract between the state and the people. It is an appeal for the Lebanese people to reclaim their rights, freedoms, and dignity. It is a call for the Lebanese government to prioritize the needs and aspirations of its citizens rather than the interests of foreign powers. It is a call for the Lebanese people to unite behind a common vision of a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Lebanon.
We, the authors of this book, support the Lebanese demand for neutrality. We stand with the Lebanese people in their struggle for a better future. We urge the international community to respect the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon and to support the country in its efforts towards neutrality, peace, and stability.
Let us build a new Lebanon, a Lebanon that is free, sovereign, and prosperous. Let us build a Lebanon that serves as a shining example of peaceful coexistence and cultural diversity.
Part I:Lebanon´s neutrality under debate
Memorandum Lebanon and active neutrality
Béchara Boutros Card. Raï
Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East
Lebanon
In a sermon delivered on July 5, 2020, I appealed to the United Nations to reaffirm the independence of Lebanon, implement all relevant UN resolutions, and recognize the country’s neutrality. Lebanon’s neutrality is indeed the guarantee of the country’s unity and its historical role, especially in this period characterized by geopolitical and constitutional transformations. Lebanon’s strength and stability will be safeguarded by its neutrality. It is, therefore, a neutral Lebanon that would be able to contribute to the stability and prosperity of the region, defend the rights of the Arab peoples, and forge just and equitable relations between the Middle East and Europe, due to Lebanon’s privileged position on the Mediterranean shores.
Our appeal for neutrality has been met with widespread approval from various confessional groups, political parties, and the country’s intelligentsia who have expressed reasoned opinions through various news outlets and media publications; though some have had reservations and questions concerning the concept of neutrality. This is the reason I deemed it necessary to publish this Memorandum on “Lebanon and Active Neutrality.” I broach the subject in five points: The Proposal’s Rationale; the Concept of Neutrality; its Importance as a Necessary Platform for the Independence and Stability of Lebanon; the Interests of Lebanon and its Economy of Neutrality; and a Conclusion.
1. Proposal’s Rationale
Lebanon’s neutrality, as a constitutional form of government, may not have been on the minds of the founders of the State of Greater Lebanon. However, it certainly proved to be the driving force behind Lebanon’s foreign relations and defense policy that this small and emergent nation adopted to assert its right to self-determination and preserve its independence, unity, and identity. During the drafting of the Lebanese Constitution, Henri De Jouvenel, the French High Commissioner, asked his government to send him a copy of the Swiss Constitution, believing that it could be used as a blueprint for the constitution of Lebanese society.
This political constitutional framework was confirmed in 1943 when the government, which secured independence, declared that Lebanon was committed to “neutrality between East and West.” This concept of neutrality was enshrined in 1945 when the Charter of the League of Arab Countries was drafted, which stipulated that the decisions of the League would not be binding, even when they were made unanimously. The preparatory work as well as the many interventions preceding the final text of the League’s Charter insisted on the fact that “Lebanon is a State of support, not of confrontation.” The goal was to make Lebanon a catalyst for solidarity among the Arab nations, not a cause for division and inter-Arab conflicts. It must be noted that Lebanon has always advocated against defection from Arab solidarity in favor of strategies that would serve foreign regimes at the expense of common Arab interests.
The idea of neutrality has been a recurrent theme in the speeches of the presidents of the Republic and in the statements of succeeding governments (Cabinet of Ministers), as well as in the documents that came out of the conferences of national dialogue, including “the Declaration of Baabda” of June 11, 2012, approved unanimously and which included the expression “to ensure the neutrality (distancing) of Lebanon.” This statement was submitted to the United Nations and distributed as an official document of the Security Council and the General Assembly (see both documents: A/66/849 and S/2012/477). Likewise, the Security Council communiqué, dated 03/19/2015, called on all Lebanese parties to adhere to the letter and spirit of this Declaration.
Due to this policy of wisdom and prudence, Lebanon has managed to preserve the unity of its territory, despite the numerous attempts and calls for Arab unification proposals and the countless Israeli-Arab wars. Indeed, all of Israel’s neighboring countries (Syria, Jordan, and Egypt) have lost parts of their territory, except the State of Lebanon. In addition, Lebanon’s relative detachment from regional conflicts – between 1943 and 1975 – created prosperity, wealth, growth, and rising individual income, as well as declining unemployment, which has earned Lebanon the title of “Switzerland of the East”.
This period was disrupted in 1958 when Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser tried to include Lebanon in the short-lived project of Syro-Egyptian unity. The Lebanese, however, quickly survived this crisis, reconciled, and continued on the path of nation-building. The balance of power in Lebanon was turned upside down with the ascendency of the Palestine Liberation Organization as a military power in its armed struggle against Israel. This destabilizing factor divided the Lebanese into two camps: those who supported the PLO and those who opposed it. A situation that led to the outbreak of the civil war in 1975.
Under pressure from internal divisions and external interference, the Lebanese government made crucial concessions and signed the Cairo Accord in 1969, compromising its sovereignty. The Cairo Accord authorized Palestinian groups to carry out military operations against Israel from Lebanese territory, especially in the southern region of the country.
These events caused the Lebanese government and various ideological and political groups to be drawn into regional conflicts, which were mostly aligned along political, religious, ideological, and military considerations. As a consequence, Israel occupied Lebanon (1978-2000); Palestinian organizations controlled most of the southern territory, reaching as far as central Beirut (1969-2005); the Syrian army entered Lebanon (1976-2005); and continuing the same trend of outside interference and dominance, Hezbollah was established and molded religiously, ideologically, and militarily to be the instrument that spreads the ideas of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s revolution (1981-…).
All these events took place because the country deviated from the policy of neutrality, which was tacitly recognized but without a supporting constitutional text. Thus, the State began gradually to lose its central authority, the country its territorial sovereignty, the nation its political role, the national pact its equilibrium, and society its specific cultural identity. This imbalance has also produced secondary internal conflicts, but as violent as the main conflicts that were brought into existence in the first place. And behold, Lebanon today is teetering between unity and division.
The experience of one hundred years (1920-2020) of the life of the State of Greater Lebanon has shown that it is difficult for Lebanon to be the country-message without adopting the politics of neutrality. Alignment with the conflicts of the Middle East and its peoples has affected the principle of partnership between Christians and Muslims, in its spiritual, national, and human aspects. Lebanon has thus entered a state of disintegration, and the various attempts at a solution and compromise have failed. This is why nothing would save its unity, its independence, and its stability except neutrality, knowing that these various and deep-seated conflicts threaten not only the state but the very being of the nation.
The Declaration of the Neutrality of Lebanon is a founding act, like the Declaration of the State of Greater Lebanon in 1920, and the Declaration of Independence in 1943. The creation of Greater Lebanon as an independent State prevented the Lebanese from being absorbed by various attempts at Arab-Islamic unity and gave them a democratic system of governance that allowed them to peacefully coexist. The independence of Lebanon legitimized its existence as a sovereign nation with a central authority to protect its citizens from internal and external threats. Political neutrality, which is yet to be achieved, prevents the division of Lebanon, protects it from wars, and retains its specificity. Neutrality is thus the “pact of stability”, after the two pacts of existence and sovereignty.
2. The Concept of Active Neutrality
Lebanon, with its active neutrality, enjoys three interconnected, complementary, and indivisible dimensions.
The first dimension is the definitive refusal of Lebanon to join coalitions, axes, political conflicts, and wars, regionally and internationally; as well as the abstention of any state, from the region or elsewhere, from interfering in its affairs, or dominating it, or invading it, or occupying it, or using its territory for military purposes, in accordance to The Second Hague Convention (October 18, 1907) as well as the other regional and international conventions which followed it.
It is Lebanon’s prerogative to remain an active member of the League of Arab Nations and the United Nations. Lebanon’s membership in both organizations not only contributes to the prospect of solidarity among the nations but also strengthens the international commitment to peace and human progress.
The second dimension concerns Lebanon’s solidarity with the causes of Human Rights and freedom, especially Arab causes which gained unanimous support from the member nations of the Arab League and the United Nations. Therefore, Lebanon will continue to defend the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and work for a just and equitable solution for the Palestinian refugees, especially those who live in its territory. Neutral Lebanon could thus play its role and assume “its mission” in its Arab context, which the Apostolic Exhortation of Saint Pope John Paul II, “A New Hope for Lebanon”, presents in detail (paragraphs 92-93), as well as take initiatives for reconciliation and rapprochement between various Arab countries and regional powers, and resolve conflicts. Religious and cultural pluralism, which encapsulates the true nature of Lebanese society, makes Lebanon a land of encounter and dialogue between religions, cultures, and civilizations following the United Nations’ decision of September 2019, to establish in Lebanon “the Academy for Human Encounters and Dialogue”. Given the ideal location of Lebanon on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, Lebanon is also a bridge linking the cultures, economies, and civilizations of East and West.
The third dimension consists in strengthening the Lebanese State through its various institutions: military, judicial, legislative, and executive. A strong Lebanese State will promote unity, peace, and justice for all its citizens and will ensure opportunities for creativity, entrepreneurship, and social and economic prosperity. Furthermore, a strong State endowed with these qualities will certainly be capable of safeguarding internal peace and defending the nation from external threats. A strong and neutral Lebanon also needs a just and swift resolution to the issues of border demarcation with Israel, following the Armistice Agreement (1949), as well as acceptance of Lebanon’s border as recognized internationally by the State of Syria.
3. Neutrality as a Source of Independence and Stability for Lebanon
Neutrality ensures Lebanon’s withdrawal from prospects of regional and international conflicts and wars. Moreover, neutrality will provide Lebanon with the necessary political and military means to prevent the reoccurrence of internal struggles and turmoil (1958, 1969, 1973, 1975) that have rocked the nation since the declaration of the State of Greater Lebanon. A cursory reading of the historical causes of conflicts enables one to identify four main categories:
A. Internal conflicts between religious groups and confessional communities that have different allegiances justified based on nationalistic and ideological trends aimed at changing the government regime in the country or serving the interests of other countries.
B. Geo-political conflicts in neighboring countries that have spilled over into Lebanon.
C. The lack of Political clarity in Syria’s relationship with Lebanon regarding its territory or authority or its international borders, which has often caused conflicts between the two countries.
D. The political, military, economic, social, and border implications of the creation of the State of Israel in Lebanon and the arrival of thousands of displaced Palestinian refugees to reside in its territory.
It is a fact of history that these conflicts and their causes received superficial and temporary solutions, until the moment when the Constitution was amended after the Taef Agreement of 1989, with the transfer of executive power from the Presidency of the Republic to the Cabinet of Ministers, and the adoption of parity in parliament. All these political and constitutional compromises succeeded in stopping the war, but not the conflict, which escalated after each compromise; a situation that included within it the seeds of future conflicts. Lebanon has thus become a country where religious and communitarian groups contend for more power. This power grab by these various religious and political groups has made outside interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs a necessary factor for the very survival of these groups. As a consequence, Lebanon has become a terrain for “proxy wars” for others.
If these causes are not adequately addressed, conflicts and wars will continue, and consequently, one of these three scenarios might occur: either one confessional community dominates the others by force through armed warfare, exercising hegemony over the state and threatening its neighbors and regional balance; or Lebanon remains a failed state, exposed without weight or stability; or others may decide the fate of Lebanon by redefining its territorial integrity and national sovereignty in the context of the radical changes that continue to shape the present and future of the entire region. This is why our call for Neutrality is to avoid any or all of these scenarios and to strengthen and consolidate sovereignty and stability.
4. The Benefits of Neutrality for Lebanon and its Economy
a) Lebanon will benefit from the status of neutrality in two main points:
1. Neutrality safeguards the unity of Lebanon, in terms of its territorial integrity and the preservation of its population, and revives the national Islamic-Christian partnership, which has been weakened in many instances. Lebanon’s neutrality ensures that its eighteen confessional communities regain their security and stability, as well as their mutual trust far from conflicts. It is only through this political platform of neutrality and peaceful coexistence among various social and religious groups that Lebanon can positively contribute to the stability of the region and peace in the world.
2. Neutrality makes all components of Lebanese society more flexible and positive because it excludes alignment and biased approaches in the exercise of prerogatives and authority among those in power, regardless of their political or confessional affiliation.
b) Many sectors of the economy will benefit from Lebanon’s neutrality.
Neutrality will strengthen the economy due to stability, security, and the ingenuity of the Lebanese people who tend to prosper in times of peace and opportunity. We mention here seven sectors specific to Lebanon, which could strengthen its economy:
1. The long history of Lebanon as a banking and financial hub in the Middle East and its internationally renowned experts in this field surely puts Lebanon at an advantage over other countries in the region. This is simply because stability and security build trust.
2. The health sector and the high standard of hospitals and advancement in technology: Lebanon is closer to Middle Eastern countries than Europe and the United States, Lebanon’s official language is Arabic, educated Lebanese are fluent in several Western languages, and Lebanon hospitality business make the country suitable to a major medical center not for the Middle East, but also the world.
3. Lebanon is a tourism destination for the Middle East and the world. When stability and security are in place, as history demonstrates, Lebanon can regain its status as a major world destination for tourists. Lebanon’s first-class hotels, resorts, restaurants, and hospitality industry make the country an attractive tourism destination.
4. Throughout its history, Lebanon has been a leading center for education for the entire Middle East due to its high standards of learning, research, and publications, which led many Arab families to prefer Lebanon over Europe and the United States. Through this, Lebanon contributes to the promotion of the spirit of concord and peace.
5. Lebanon’s stability and security attract expatriates to return to invest in various projects. They will contribute to the creation of jobs, growth, and quality of life that Lebanon experienced between the fifties and the beginning of the seventies of the last century.
6. Lebanon benefits from neutrality thanks to its membership in the Arab world, its location on the shores of the Mediterranean, and its historical role and civilization.
7. Due to its unique history, and cultural and political characteristics, Lebanon will become the axis of the Mediterranean Union, where the interests of all parties intersect. The European Partnership and the Mediterranean Union are two vital projects for Lebanon. The idea of the Mediterranean Union is at the heart of a vision for the future; and this “Union” carries the capacity to create a new system of values as well as political, economic, cultural, and maritime force in this strategic region of the world. Moreover, this would make Europe more linked to the Arab world, more attentive to its interests, and therefore less quick to defend Israel.
5. What We Need
Following what has been delineated in this Memorandum, we call on both the Arab and international communities to understand the compelling historical, security, political, economic, and cultural reasons that drive most Lebanese to adopt “Active Neutrality”; and that the Organization of the United Nations should decide on Lebanon’s neutrality in a timely fashion. We consider neutrality in three dimensions:
Firstly, Lebanon pursued neutrality from its founding until the “Cairo Accord”, signed in 1969, allowing Palestinian refugees to acquire heavy weapons and to fight Israel from Lebanese territory, which was followed by the emergence of armed Lebanese and non-Lebanese groups outside the control of the State.
Secondly, Lebanon, thanks to its democratic and liberal political system of governance, and its specific religious and cultural pluralism, organized within the framework of the Constitution and the National Pact, and thanks to its location on the shores of the Mediterranean between the East and Europe, enjoys the role of promoting peace and stability in the region. Due to Lebanon’s policy of mediation, rapprochement, and reconciliation between Arab countries, and its staunch commitment to human rights, it continues to provide an indispensable forum for dialogue between religions, cultures, and civilizations.
Thirdly, Lebanon, founded on pluralism and balance between its diverse religious and cultural groups, needs, in order to survive, that the United Nations, along with the countries concerned, find a solution for the half a million Palestinian refugees and almost one and a half million displaced Syrians present on its territory.
Dimane, August 7, 2020.
Béchara Boutros Card. RAÏ
Patriarch of Antioch and All the East
Lebanon true to itself: realistic neutrality for peace
Rubens Ricupero
Universidade de São Paulo
Interviewed by
Miguel Mahfoud
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Brazil
Working to create the José Bonifácio chair at Universidade de São Paulo, while simultaneously responding to requests for comments about sociopolitical and economic challenges of the new world order, Prof. Rubens Ricupero insists on joining the debate about Lebanon’s neutrality.1
His unique experience makes him a particularly significant interlocutor in such a debate: Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development for nine years; with a successful career as a diplomat along with the most important international partners of Brazil; a skilled Finance and Environment Minister. Professor of International Affairs both in Brazil and abroad, he points out, with vivid interest, key aspects for a realistic, clear, and patient action – to be conducted both by the civil society and the political class – in favor of Lebanon and its contemporary challenges.
Prof. Rubens Ricupero answered our questions remotely from his São Paulo residence on June 2022.
* * *
Lebanon has been involved in an intense debate about its condition of active neutrality, which tends to favor a stability pact and form conditions for economic restructuring and the possibility of playing the role of the protagonist in both regional and international contexts, from the historical experience of religious coexistence that would be an important identity factor. The Maronite Patriarch Cardinal Raï, one important protagonist of the debate, requests support from the international community and even requests that the UN recognize the country’s neutrality status.
You are quite experienced and also a great connoisseur of cultural, economic, and international relations dynamics, with direct knowledge of Lebanon’s sociopolitical reality. Could you describe your experiences in that multicultural community, with the challenge of coexisting as the country’s identity? What experiences did you draw from the challenge of building such a diverse society?
First of all, I would like to thank you for the honor of inviting me to talk about this subject. As a matter of fact, as you had the opportunity to recall, I have spent many years outside of Itamaraty, working for the UN. Moreover, the last nine years of my active life were dedicated to the UN. From 1995 to 2004, I served as Secretary-General for The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Geneva, and also accumulated the role of Under-Secretary-General of the UN. During that period, I visited Lebanon and other Middle-Eastern countries many times.
Regarding Lebanon, I visited the country under an official invitation from the government: my host was the Minister of Trade and Industry at that time, for the entity I directed was primarily concerned with trade and commerce. When I visited Lebanon, I have been not only to Beirut but also to the rest of the country: I have been to Bekaa Valley, and I have been to the South, close to areas that are still very turbulent nowadays.
On one occasion, we were near Qana al Jalil, the city where – according to some – the first miracle of Jesus took place, the miracle of turning water into wine. We were in the South of Lebanon and all of a sudden, we heard a very loud noise. My wife said, “How curious, this sounds like thunder, but there are no clouds in the sky”. And the driver said: “That is artillery, the Israeli cannons are placed nearby”. There was also a community center around, which had been destroyed just a little earlier by a bomb, in one of the attacks that resulted in many casualties.
I was able to get in touch with the up-close reality of different areas of the country. On one particular special occasion, I was received by all the authorities: the president of the country, the president of the Chamber, and various presidents representing different communities. I was able to meet both Maronite Christians and Christians of other denominations and also met representatives of Shia and Sunni Muslims, the Druze community, and others. I had a very interesting experience with this reality that you described.
Despite its small territory, Lebanon is much like a miniature of the world, a microcosm of diversity, because it shelters an enormous diversity of cultures, peoples, and religions. Curiously, when compared to Lebanon, Brazil is a much larger, continental country, but is far from having such great diversity. In a small territorial base, Lebanon concentrates all of these communities that usually live in harmony and peace. Such harmony is almost always disturbed only by outside interference. Conflicts in the region end up having an impact because they demand loyalty among the different communities and end up playing one against the other.
On this note, I have really appreciated the statements made by Maronite Patriarch Cardinal Béchara Boutros Raï because, on several occasions, in the presence of the highest authorities, he has repeated his proposal, which is quite well elaborated. He states that Lebanon should be true to itself: that Lebanon never forgets that it was created as a kind of oasis of peace and coexistence, a meeting point for cultures, a place for dialogue among civilizations; that this vocation of Lebanon is actually the quintessence of its national identity. As he remarks, Lebanon was not created to be an enemy of neighboring and fellow peoples, it was created to be a bridge, and – as Pope John Paul II once said – Lebanon would convey a message of peace, Lebanon would be in itself a message of peace, and indeed, at times, the country represented this idea. What the Cardinal desires most is an effort for Lebanon to be faithful to this founding purpose, defining three qualities:
First, the idea that Lebanon is a definitive country, that is, not a transition to something else, but a definitive country, which implies the idea that the pact of living together with the different communities must also be definitive, a pact once and for all.
Second – which seems to me to be very appropriate – is that the vocation of a part of Lebanon to Christianity must also be respected and valued as something definitive: Lebanon is – and was, even at its foundation – a shelter for this diversity of religious confessions. In this matter, Lebanon can even be understood as a pioneer, a precursor at a time when there was strong intolerance towards diversities and religious confessions.
And finally, the third point: For this idea to be possible, it is necessary that all Lebanese show a single loyalty, a loyalty, above all, to Lebanon itself, and not divided loyalties towards foreign countries that are fighting in the region, therefore, leading to conflicts.
This idea, I must say, conveys such clarity, discernment, and wisdom that it imposes itself by the very force of the thought. It is impossible to hear or read his proposals and not realize that this is the way; this is the way of survival, prosperity, and reconstruction of Lebanon and of everything that was lost during the extremely negative period of the civil war; this is the way to prevent that from happening again and to avoid tragic cases such as the invasion of Israel, which also caused enormous trauma.
For those conditions to be created, it will take a lot of effort. Being a realistic man, Cardinal Raï recognizes, first of all, that Lebanon does not enjoy immunity. That means that other countries around Lebanon still do not respect its option for non-alignment, for the so-called positive, constructive, active neutrality. This neutrality does not mean indifference but rather the desire to become a bridge of approximation and not a factor of further conflict. Not enjoying this immunity yet, Lebanon does not have the strength, military power, and conditions to impose, in a certain way, this option. Hence the Cardinal’s appeal, so that the international community – perhaps even a United Nations conference – can deliberate and decide on this matter, which, to me, is very appropriate.
Another very interesting aspect that he highlights, which also reveals how realistic he is, comprises one of the indispensable conditions for achieving this: Lebanon itself needs to reach a minimum of internal consensus. Lebanon needs to realize that this is the path, and therefore, all communities must seek it. As we know, unfortunately, this condition is not yet fulfilled.
The fact, as we know very well, is that Lebanon is under heavy manipulation by other forces nowadays. Unfortunately, Lebanon lies in a very unfavorable geographical position. Other neutrality-embracing countries also suffered from that disadvantage in their early moments, such as Switzerland, for example. Switzerland became neutral after the Napoleonic wars, at a time when Europe was still in a situation of almost permanent conflict, but fortunately, there was an evolution that later allowed respect for Switzerland’s neutrality, which has been maintained for over 200 years now. Unfortunately, this is not yet the situation in the Middle East region, where Lebanon is located. Lebanon lies in a region where conflicts are multiplying. It is enough to remember that Lebanon has been linked, since its origins, with Syria, one of the most troubled countries in the world: there is no need to say much about it, everyone has followed the Syrian civil war, which has not ended yet: there are still episodes of battle and interferences of all kinds. Furthermore, Lebanon suffers – to this day – especially in the South, from Israeli interference: part of its sovereignty has even been limited due to the presence of Israeli forces. The conflict with Israel persists: it often flares up. In addition to the problems related to water and of other natures... Another very serious conflict in recent years has gradually surpassed the conflicts between Israel and the Palestinians (or Arabs): the great conflict involving Iran on one side and Arabia Saudi on the other – or the Shias versus the Sunnis. This conflict, as we know, also has a lot of repercussions within Lebanon through the actions of both Iran and Syria.
Therefore, the situation is complex, and it represents a challenge both for the Lebanese and the international community. Cardinal Raï knew how to face this challenge and offered a path, a path that could lead to overcoming this problem. That is what I could say as an initial analysis of the problem.
You have just mentioned a series of tensions and conflicts, which are very significant for Lebanon, involving Israel and the Palestinian question, Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Others could also point out, as a factor of intervention in Lebanon, the historical presence of France, Russia, and Great Britain or the United Arab Emirates as a bridge with the United States of America. Some say that it would not be realistic to speak of Lebanon’s neutrality in this context of such strong intervention, in which even Lebanese political parties are structured from these many international interferences. Nevertheless, you emphasize the realistic aspect of Lebanon’s neutrality proposal. Where is realism?
I believe that realism is not about ignoring the difficulties that exist and that are enormous, but it is about indicating the only rational path. And why is that? It is because the alternative to active neutrality is the indefinite maintenance of the status quo, which we know is never sustained. This status quo translates into a very precarious, very unstable peace, disturbed from time to time by conflicts that, in general, come from abroad. We are witnessing how the maintenance of the status quo is, little by little, threatening to destroy Lebanon. The Lebanon that was, a few decades ago, the Switzerland of the Middle East (a country of extraordinary prosperity that attracted all classes of people from Arab countries to Beirut), that Lebanon, to a large extent, has already disappeared.
As I recalled before, Lebanon experienced a terrible episode of civil war, of enormous and pointless destruction. Lebanon was traumatized by many attacks that removed major political figures from the scene. And it suffered a seemingly never-ending occupation by Syria. I remember that at the time of the Syrian occupation, it was thought that it would become permanent. When I was in Lebanon, I traveled to Bekaa Valley, and there were posters everywhere with pictures of Syrian President Bashar Hafez al-Assad: Syrians were still present throughout that region. I talked to people and it seemed difficult to leave Syria. However, the occupation eventually ended in a peaceful way. After that, we still had terrible episodes, such as the explosion of Porto São Jorge in Beirut, which to this day has not been fully clarified. Now, as I said, the alternatives are few. What is the continuation of the status quo? The worsening of conflicts, jeopardizing the future of the country more and more. The alternative is to search for a solution that is not easy, but feasible because all the needed elements are there.
What I appreciate about Cardinal Raï’s sermons is that he does not speak only in nebulous and vague terms, he actually goes into very concrete details: he talks about elections, the need for a new economic and financial agreement, or a monetary fund. In short, he comes down to the reality of what affects daily life in Lebanon, and it makes sense in every way. It is a proposal that seems to me to be very well thought out.
The difficulties are notorious: we know that after Cardinal Raï’s great sermon on July 5, 2020, the president of the Shiite Higher Council criticized him harshly, although he did not explicitly mention the Cardinal. One of the difficulties that emerged is that, as is well known, the configuration of forces within Lebanon has changed a lot over the last 20 or 25 years: it is no longer how it traditionally used to be, because now a powerful force has emerged, both political and military, which is Hezbollah, formed mainly by Shia communities in the south. The great expression of the Shia community was the Hamal movement, but this movement was supplanted by Hezbollah which, as we know, receives very effective support from Iran through Syria. It is a military group that faced the Israelis with effective capacity and, therefore, acquired great influence inside the country. This issue will have to be sorted out by the Lebanese political forces themselves in agreement with the Shiite leaders themselves: that is the solution. First of all, harmony and internal agreement are crucial to creating conditions for a state of neutrality. I don’t think it would be possible to impose neutrality from the outside without prior internal consensus. Therefore, I consider Cardinal Raï’s role to be very correct in preaching this unity.
As we know, that is not a simple task: even the Christian community, in the broadest sense, is divided. As a matter of fact, there are groups of Christians, even Maronites, in alignment with the Shias and Hezbollah. Therefore, the task is not easy. I do not mean to simplify the matter, but that’s what politics is: patience to solve difficult problems.
In 1995, when I was the Brazilian ambassador to Rome, I joined the president of Italy on a visit to Brazil. The president was Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, an old name for Christian Democracy since the party’s founding after World War II. In conversation, he quoted Alcide De Gasperi, the great statesman responsible for the foundation of modern Italy, a Christian democrat: it is not true that politics requires patience, politics is patience; the synonym and essence of politics is patience. This applies not only to Lebanon but to all the great political dilemmas in the world: the matter of patience, of continuously searching for a solution, based on objective truth, that leads to an effort of conciliation and understanding between the different groups engaged in political life.
