- Home
- War in the Middle East
- Christians in Lebanon: Rights Versus Roles
The discussion on the rights of Christians in Lebanon takes center stage in various periods — be it amidst the fervor of elections, times of heightened tension, or when it becomes relevant to review and reshuffle all the pertinent matters at hand.
Today, we are surfing through a multitude of phases. We are currently in a period dominated by a delayed presidential election and heightened tensions within the Christian community amidst a global war related to the army commander. Furthermore, this marks a period of strategic recalibration, unmistakably reflected in the evolving power dynamics across the region following the Gaza war.
Multiple factors have merged, once again putting forward the Christian narrative. This is especially legitimate and time-appropriate as it occurs against the backdrop of persistent anxieties within the Christian scene.
One of the most prominent expressions of provocative language in recent days is attributed to MP Cesar Abi Khalil, who accused the Lebanese Forces (LF) of attempting to undermine the role and rights of Christians on multiple fronts.
As such, Abi Khalil raised the issue of restricting the president's powers within the Taif Agreement, bearing in mind that the former leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) consistently upheld his commitment to the aforementioned Agreement during his presidency. Yet, he seems to have strayed from that commitment once outside Baabda’s palace, despite wholeheartedly adhering to it while he was Head of State.
In this context, Abi Khalil is fully aware that, at the time, the matter of powers and authorities within the Taif Agreement was beyond the control of both the Lebanese Forces and General Michel Aoun and was not within Bkerke’s purview either. Rather, it was the outcome of an equation that weakened Christians during internal conflicts. One that was imposed by the international alliance to bring an end to the war in Lebanon.
Another issue involves the abandonment of some ministries to ex-PM Fouad Siniora and his team.
For the sake of historical clarity, one should recall which ministerial portfolios were held by Christians during Siniora’s Cabinet. This could help pinpoint whether the relinquishments that occurred stemmed from the Lebanese Forces or from others. In the initial cabinet, key ministries such as Justice, Industry, Defense, Culture and Economy went to Christians. In the subsequent government – which the FPM was a part of –, the ministerial portfolios of Interior, Environment and Defense, among others, were attributed to Christians not affiliated with the FPM.
In this context, there was no abandonment of ministerial positions at any point. Established norms reveal that the responsibilities were allocated among the different religious groups.
Unfortunately, a closer look at the recent governments involving the Free Patriotic Movement shows that the portfolios held by "Christians" have not significantly bolstered Christians and their national presence in Lebanon. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is evidently absent, forsaking Lebanon’s external influence. The Ministry of Defense is reluctant to address the extension of the army commander and defending the southern front. The Ministry of Justice has made no significant contributions to judicial reform, while the Ministry of Energy is mired in lamentation and distress.
It would have been more fitting, for instance, to secure the Ministry of Culture, rather than to appoint a minister from Hezbollah who seeks to impose its cultural agenda on Lebanon, undermining the principles of openness and advocating for a return to autocratic rule.
The third point highlighted by Cesar Abi Khalil pertains to the electoral law and the apportionment of immigrants' votes. Abi Khalil persists in advocating for expatriates' right to vote for MPs from different continents. These representatives would be assigned six seats, one for each religion. This type of voting put forward by Abi Khalil is different from the immigrants voting in their own district like the rest of the Lebanese citizens. This concern will certainly be prevalent in Cesar Abi Khalil's train of thought, as the immigrants' votes "punished" the Free Patriotic Movement during the last elections, which led the Lebanese Forces to take the lead overseas.
Regarding legislative matters in the absence of a president, the issue does not pertain to the LF, as they are not the ones obstructing the quorum. In fact, an agreement has been reached between the latter party and the Free Patriotic Movement on a "compromise" presidential candidate. If Abi Khalil has any issues with Hezbollah, he should address those concerns directly to them.
The last point pertains to a comparison between ISIS and the LF, the latter presumably acting worse than the former. The fear-inducing strategy consistently used by the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah over the years is geared towards ensuring protection and reinforcing a sense of allegiance among Christian allies.
As a side note, what has been mentioned above is neither in defense of the LF nor a random attack on the FPM.
The underlying message is the following: what is important to Christians is not merely their rights as such, but their role as well. In this context, it’s worth recalling that the Kataeb party challenged the Cairo Agreement with the smallest parliamentary representation. In addition, when the Free Patriotic Movement was in opposition, it had the smallest bloc ever (fewer than 15 MPs). Furthermore, the Lebanese Forces grappled with many difficulties when its leader was behind bars and the party was dissolved.
In Lebanon, Christianity plays a role, even if this rests on the presence of only one Christian. This is a message to whomever is willing to listen.
Today, we are surfing through a multitude of phases. We are currently in a period dominated by a delayed presidential election and heightened tensions within the Christian community amidst a global war related to the army commander. Furthermore, this marks a period of strategic recalibration, unmistakably reflected in the evolving power dynamics across the region following the Gaza war.
Multiple factors have merged, once again putting forward the Christian narrative. This is especially legitimate and time-appropriate as it occurs against the backdrop of persistent anxieties within the Christian scene.
One of the most prominent expressions of provocative language in recent days is attributed to MP Cesar Abi Khalil, who accused the Lebanese Forces (LF) of attempting to undermine the role and rights of Christians on multiple fronts.
As such, Abi Khalil raised the issue of restricting the president's powers within the Taif Agreement, bearing in mind that the former leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) consistently upheld his commitment to the aforementioned Agreement during his presidency. Yet, he seems to have strayed from that commitment once outside Baabda’s palace, despite wholeheartedly adhering to it while he was Head of State.
In this context, Abi Khalil is fully aware that, at the time, the matter of powers and authorities within the Taif Agreement was beyond the control of both the Lebanese Forces and General Michel Aoun and was not within Bkerke’s purview either. Rather, it was the outcome of an equation that weakened Christians during internal conflicts. One that was imposed by the international alliance to bring an end to the war in Lebanon.
Another issue involves the abandonment of some ministries to ex-PM Fouad Siniora and his team.
For the sake of historical clarity, one should recall which ministerial portfolios were held by Christians during Siniora’s Cabinet. This could help pinpoint whether the relinquishments that occurred stemmed from the Lebanese Forces or from others. In the initial cabinet, key ministries such as Justice, Industry, Defense, Culture and Economy went to Christians. In the subsequent government – which the FPM was a part of –, the ministerial portfolios of Interior, Environment and Defense, among others, were attributed to Christians not affiliated with the FPM.
In this context, there was no abandonment of ministerial positions at any point. Established norms reveal that the responsibilities were allocated among the different religious groups.
Unfortunately, a closer look at the recent governments involving the Free Patriotic Movement shows that the portfolios held by "Christians" have not significantly bolstered Christians and their national presence in Lebanon. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is evidently absent, forsaking Lebanon’s external influence. The Ministry of Defense is reluctant to address the extension of the army commander and defending the southern front. The Ministry of Justice has made no significant contributions to judicial reform, while the Ministry of Energy is mired in lamentation and distress.
It would have been more fitting, for instance, to secure the Ministry of Culture, rather than to appoint a minister from Hezbollah who seeks to impose its cultural agenda on Lebanon, undermining the principles of openness and advocating for a return to autocratic rule.
The third point highlighted by Cesar Abi Khalil pertains to the electoral law and the apportionment of immigrants' votes. Abi Khalil persists in advocating for expatriates' right to vote for MPs from different continents. These representatives would be assigned six seats, one for each religion. This type of voting put forward by Abi Khalil is different from the immigrants voting in their own district like the rest of the Lebanese citizens. This concern will certainly be prevalent in Cesar Abi Khalil's train of thought, as the immigrants' votes "punished" the Free Patriotic Movement during the last elections, which led the Lebanese Forces to take the lead overseas.
Regarding legislative matters in the absence of a president, the issue does not pertain to the LF, as they are not the ones obstructing the quorum. In fact, an agreement has been reached between the latter party and the Free Patriotic Movement on a "compromise" presidential candidate. If Abi Khalil has any issues with Hezbollah, he should address those concerns directly to them.
The last point pertains to a comparison between ISIS and the LF, the latter presumably acting worse than the former. The fear-inducing strategy consistently used by the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah over the years is geared towards ensuring protection and reinforcing a sense of allegiance among Christian allies.
As a side note, what has been mentioned above is neither in defense of the LF nor a random attack on the FPM.
The underlying message is the following: what is important to Christians is not merely their rights as such, but their role as well. In this context, it’s worth recalling that the Kataeb party challenged the Cairo Agreement with the smallest parliamentary representation. In addition, when the Free Patriotic Movement was in opposition, it had the smallest bloc ever (fewer than 15 MPs). Furthermore, the Lebanese Forces grappled with many difficulties when its leader was behind bars and the party was dissolved.
In Lebanon, Christianity plays a role, even if this rests on the presence of only one Christian. This is a message to whomever is willing to listen.
Comments