Lebanese Communist Party on danger of losing independence

Lebanese people are watching with concern the continued diminishing of the features of independence year after year. Its transformation from a vibrant national holiday into merely a commemoration was not something that happened suddenly. Lebanon has faced, and continues to face, two hostile factors: the wars, ambitions and repeated aggressions of the Zionist enemy, and the internal upheavals and divisions that have created and continue to create deep cracks in the unity of its people and entity. These have brought the Lebanese, particularly today, into a state of intense anxiety about Lebanon’s fate and about their existence and the future of their children... They see the dangers of keeping Lebanon as an open arena for the interaction of internal disputes, and of external mediation and intervention.

These causes have brought our country to decline and collapse, and have kept its stability fragile. They have clearly revealed, on the one hand, the danger of Zionist aggression and its ambitions, and, on the other, the nature of the sectarian power-sharing system as a source of internal divisions and conflicts. Instead of bringing about changes that meet the needs of Lebanon, its people and its homeland, the ruling class has clung to the existing situation and its sectarian foundations, which generate vertical divisions in society and political life, with the aim of obscuring the reality of the social class struggle, dividing those who have the same and common interests among the overwhelming majority of the people, and preventing accountability. This is despite the fact that adopting a governing approach that achieves the unity of the Lebanese is an internal necessity and a necessity for confronting the external danger. But this necessity is not a priority; their fundamental concern is their exploitation of the people, preserving opportunities for deals and power-sharing, and the perpetuation of their rule... Preserving independence and strengthening it was not among these priorities. Therefore, they brought the country and the social and general conditions of the people to the lowest levels on the global scale. They did not build a state that protects Lebanon from dangers and achieves an acceptable degree of social justice and internal unity. They followed the path of failing in the face of Israel’s aggressions and wars and dependence on the colonial West that supports it, particularly the United States, which led to the emergence of popular resistance at different stages and differing in the nature of its structure and its internal objectives.

Independence has withered as a result of all this, accompanied by the squandering of the enormous sacrifices made by our people to achieve it, beginning with the popular uprisings and revolts of our people against Ottoman domination and attempts at Turkification, through the martyrs of 6 May 1916, and up to the National Conference in 1943, which constituted the culmination of the battle for independence. The Communist Party and its leader Farajallah al-Helou and his comrades played a prominent role at the conference and at the popular level in the squares and streets of Lebanese cities. The requirements for protecting independence and restoring its former vitality require adopting an approach that achieves structural change and provides the requirements for internal unity and meeting the needs and livelihoods of the Lebanese and their working classes, including recovering stolen funds and returning depositors’ money. The strength and authority of the state lie in the unity of its people, not in the mafias of banks, monopolies and rampant corruption.

Keeping our country and our people between the danger of the external enemy and the danger of internal sectarian divisions keeps Lebanon in the quagmire of weakness, collapse and disintegration. Adopting a transformative approach by those in power that strengthens the role of the state and its ability to protect Lebanon is the way to restore the vitality of independence, which has now become an urgent national necessity.

Keeping the electoral law as it is today, and making it a matter of confrontation between the various forces of power, is a distraction for people from their issues and rights, and may lead to the postponement of elections. It would be more appropriate for the confrontation to be over achieving the substance of Article 22 of the Constitution concerning the abolition of sectarianism, and implementing the Taif Agreement by electing the first parliament after its adoption without sectarian restrictions, and through an electoral law based on proportional representation and a large electoral district, in order to provide genuine representation of the people. This has been stipulated for 35 years but has not been implemented. Partial reform, despite its positive aspects, does not take Lebanon out of the dark tunnel. The interest of Lebanon, the people and the homeland, lies in achieving change.

(Photo: Al Nidaa)