Listen To The Article
Who will ever be able to determine the fate of the 622 Lebanese soldiers supposedly held in Baath prisons? Who will be able to determine the fate of the 100,000 people who disappeared during the twelve years of the Syrian civil war? Who, if not an independent body sponsored by the United Nations? Yet, Lebanon has just abstained from voting for the creation of such a humanitarian body!
How would you have expected our Minister of Foreign Affairs to react against Syria, the Shiite duo, and Gen. (Michel) Aoun? Would you have expected him to die?!
“You must be joking,” would have replied Lea Salameh! Whoever told you that Abdallah Bou Habib was destined for martyrdom? He most likely does not belong to the category of people who sacrifice themselves, let alone dare to.
Abstention Vote and Uproar
At the end of June, the United Nations General Assembly sought to “clarify” the fate of 100,000 people reported missing during the twelve years of war in Syria. This is when our Minister of Foreign Affairs announced that Lebanon would abstain from voting on the resolution aimed at “establishing an independent organism backed by the international community to investigate the fate of the victims of forced disappearances.”
“This is shameful,” was the immediate reaction of a former Syrian prison inmate. The Association of Detainees and Victims of Enforced Disappearances in Syria was infuriated and did not hesitate to hold the Prime Minister, the concerned minister, and the entire caretaker government responsible for this outrage (1).
The General Knew
As expected, the opposition leaders and sovereigntist media outlets were enraged by the decision and did not hesitate to express their indignation. But, did they really think that “Mr. Bou Habib”, who is bound to the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), would care about the missing Syrians? At a time when Michel Aoun, then Commander-in-Chief of the Lebanese army and Bou Habib’s overlord, did not care about the missing Lebanese, the ones who either donned the army uniform or were guerrilla fighters, and had fought for him on that fateful day of October 13, 1990.
“Let the dead bury their dead” was once the motto of the former president of the republic, who has at some point rebelled against Damascus’ hegemony over Lebanon. Nevertheless, driven by his ambition, Aoun visited Syria on multiple occasions, seemingly to exonerate the accredited tormentors of his compatriots. Did he take the opportunity to inquire about the fate of the missing Lebanese citizens? One might have thought that he would. But then again, why would he? As a realistic and well-informed man, he knew that there were no survivors and that the physical elimination of those who had believed in him has put an end to the senseless adventure he had unleashed. No one escaped the extrajudicial executions orchestrated by Syrian officers who disregarded the laws of war and military honor, whether in Dahr al-Wahesh, Deir al-Kalaa, or elsewhere. Aoun knew all of this, he had learned it during his days of leisure in the region of Paris!
What he Really Should Have Done
A poor country afflicted with a disappointing political class! And yet, our minister, Gebran Bassil’s puppet, could have redeemed himself for history’s sake. He could have distanced himself from the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) and taken the stance befitting a patriot by instructing our diplomatic mission at the UN to vote in favor of creating the aforementioned humanitarian independent organism. It might have been perceived as “a blatant interference in Syria’s internal affairs and a hostile approach by Western countries against Syria” (2). So what?
By doing so, he would have hit two birds with one stone. On the one hand, he would have outmaneuvered the Damascus regime, which is desperately seeking Arab and international legitimacy. On the other, he would have initiated a process of civil disobedience within the very heart of the public administration, which has fallen under Hezbollah’s grip. After all, why hold on to this corrupt structure that is withering away and allow himself to be manipulated by Iran’s vassals?
However, “Mr. Bou Habib” could have shown some heroism. After having made his statement, he could have headed to Awkar to seek political asylum at the United States Embassy, a country where he had served as ambassador. He could have been inspired by a similar scenario set by the dissident Syrian Prime Minister, Riyad Hijab, (3). Alternatively, and more simply, he could have followed Aoun’s example, when he sought refuge in an embassy, leaving his troops to face the massacre.
- "Disparus en Syrie, le Liban veut rester neutre", Ici Beyrouth, June 30 2023.
2- Statement by Syria’s Ambassador to the UN, Bassam Sabbagh.
3- In August 2012, Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Hijab defected and found refuge with his family in Jordan.
