Phoenicians - Chapter 24

8/14/2019 Phoenicians - Chapter 24

1/8

PhoeniciansChapter 24

The widespread of lands, which the Arab Nationalists considered theirs, under

the foreign powers such as Egypt under British control, Libya under Italy, and the

French and Spanish presence in parts of North Africa and the Nationalists

displeasure over this was the theme of a popular song penned by Fakhri al-Barudi

from Damascus:

The countries of the Arabs are my homelands

From Damascus to Baghdad

From Syria to Yemen,

To Egypt, and all the way to Tetuan (Morocco)1

Significantly, the Syrian national anthem written by yet another Damascus

nationalist Khalil Mardam, did not sing the virtues of Syrian as a nation-state

standing by itself, but as the Lions of Arabism, its glorious historical throne, and

its sacred shrine.

By contrast the Lebanese national anthem, written by the Maronite poet Rashid

Nakhleh sang of the old men of Lebanon and the young, in the mountains and the

plains, responding to the call of the historic fatherland and rallying around the

eternal cedar flag to defend Lebanon forever.

In the case of the Syrian Republic, the French has assembled a state while failing

to create a special nationality to go with it in my humble opinion I dont think it

was up to the French to establish anyones national identity besides, with

someone other than the local population of any country operating under the

mandate of another country, would this not make the controlled county at a

disadvantage in the growth of self and their Nationality.

The same can be applied to Lebanon, whereas contrary to the claims of the

national anthem, the concept of a natural and historical Lebanese nationality

was of course meaningful to some people, but to others they remained no

different then the others existing under a British or French mandate didnt really

matter what the paper stated they held in their hands.

1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9touan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9touanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9touanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9touan


2/8

Consider the Transjordan and Palestine assembled from what was formerly the

administrative district of Jerusalem and the southern parts of the province of Beirut

and they (Brits) had in their attempt to recreate the Biblical Land of Israel, (from

Dan to Beersheba), where they felt the Jews were to have their national

homeland. The immigrant Jews actually called the country Eretz Israel2 (which

translates as The Land of Israel), and looked to the future when they could

transform it into a Jewish State. In other words, Palestine as a country was only a

prelude to something greater; the Zionist concept of a Jewish Nationality,

reconstructed on what was conceived to be their historical homeland.

This was not the thinking of native Arab population, where they said Palestine

was no more a natural country than Lebanon, Syria, or Iraq, and might as well

have been assigned another shape or size that the British desired.

Transjordan3 was formed from the southern parts of the old province of

Damascus with a few bits of Arabia thrown in the pot, it was certainly not a natural

country, it as apart from a few towns and small clusters of villages scattered along

the highlands east of the Jordan valley, and some pastures and grain lands here and

there, consisted mostly of open desert. Even its founder, Emir Abdullah did not

regard it as a real country ---- to him it was no more than historical Arab territory

salvaged for the cause of the Great Arab Revolt, to serve one day as a base for the

re-establishment of a Greater Arab Syria. He even did not call his army the

Transjordan Army, instead naming it the Arab Legion. They too did not feel any

historical national unity.

The British had hoped that Abdullahs younger brother Faisal I (Faysal), who

was widely regarded in 1920 as the number one Arab national hero, would be a

man of sufficient stature to make a real country out of Iraq, made from a former

group of provinces from Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra. Faisals territory was declared

politically independent almost immediately after its organization as a kingdom.

Separated from other Arab countries by desert, in enjoyed the potential of rich

revenue from oil, and Iraq (the British felt) could become a country on its own more

easily than the others. Returning the position in held in ancient history during the

Assyrian and Babylonian era.

2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel3 Abdullah, who later became the king of Transjordan, and whose descendants have ruled that kingdom, now known as the

Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, ever since;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel


3/8

Internally, the Iraqis (with the exception of a minority of Christians and Jews)

were divided between Sunnis and Shiites and Arabs and Kurds --- as King of Iraq,

Faisal I was surrounded by veterans of the Arab Revolt who had followed him to

Baghdad in flight from Damascus (after hearing that he had returned from exile in

Britain), it is written he never ever did forget his lost Syrian kingdom. His regime

was more Arab nationalist than Iraqi in character, dominated by the Sunni Arab

element and resented by the Shiite Arab element, as well as by the Kurds. Although

he did much to change this attitude along with his successors, it still today has no

single national unity with the same feelings between the same divisions of

inhabitants.

Five countries formed from previously held Ottoman territory, and none of them

with a true or uncontested concept of a certain nationality --- whereas all five of

the countries were artificial creations established and given their initial

structure by a foreign imperial decree and acknowledged by the international

community through the world organization, the League of Nations.

Of the five, four in common Arab values, singled out Lebanon as being an

artificial creation of foreign imperialism in a special way, although no one

denied that the other four countries were equally artificial, there point lay

elsewhere. Among the Syrians, Iraqis, Transjordianians and the Palestinian Arabs,

no one seriously put forth a thesis in support of the national validity of the given

country. Among the Lebanese, there were those who did, which in the other four

amounted to a serious aberration, and one which could not be allowed to pass.

In the following years the citizens of the states who refused to accept their given

status, paradoxically, over time secured an accepted legitimacy for the countries as

states. The legitimacy of Lebanon alone, for the Arabs in general (including in

Lebanon) remained a full question.

The Maronites and their overwhelming Christian supporters in Lebanon had

broken the Arab consensus (in particular the Syrian-Arab consensus), the price they

had to pay as time went by, and as they solicited assistance from the French, was

to become a hefty one even more so, because they had knowingly shown a

marked insensitivity to Arab frustrations around them. For example:

In October-1918 when French forces landed in Beirut to put an end to the short-

lived Arab government of Sharif Faisal, Maronites and other Christians waving

French flags had cheered their arrival, hailing France as the tender, loving mother


4/8

(al-umm al-hanun) who was to be their savior. Among the Muslims of Beirut, who

had witnessed the arrival with grave apprehension, this Maronite/Christian greeting

was not easily forgotten.

Between 1918-1920, while these same urban Muslims of Beirut stood silently by,

or kept to their homes, Maronites from the mountains had descended from their

villages to demonstrate in the streets of the city, which they already took to be their

own, cheering and calling for an independent Greater Lebanon, and threatening

to migrate to Europe as a body if they did not get it. They went beyond the

common threat of full independence in general shouting their demands to include

independence from the effects and influence of Syria (and) not from the French

mandate, showing that the Maronites (at the time) had not and would not hesitate

to express their continuing hostility to the Arab regime, which at the time was still

established in Damascus.

The French realized that before they could attain their Greater Lebanon, they

first had to actually control the remaining Syria, and that the Arab regime in

Damascus had to be destroyed --- this was done at the Battle of Maisalun Pass, in

the Anti-Lebanon mountains in 1920. Maronite volunteers reportedly fought with

the French in the battle, and there were open Maronite celebrations of the French

victory (or rather of the Arab defeat) --- this was never forgotten in Damascus.

The creation of the new Arab state system had hardly been completed by the

late 1920s and early 1930s when political inertia and vested interests began to

give it a reality. Men with strong political ambitions competed for power and

position in the respective nations, and when the dust began to settle and these

countries gained a ruling establishment and administrative bureaucracy, the lines

between these countries hardened and the very same men who had actively

campaigned for the consolidation of the system of states now took every

opportunity to denounce the group as an imperialist partition of a single Arab

homeland.

Palestine in one way and Lebanon in another stood apart as exceptions. In

Palestine, Arabs who aspired for leadership could only make their mark by

yielding to a popular nationalist pressure, this because of the Jewish threat. The

popular and heavy handed Jewish government, supported with a mounting

international influence, was bound to greatly over-representation, so they played

the game with the best they understood. Blocking most of the moves by the British


5/8

government mandate in where the (Brits) to establish a political government. In

this, the politically ambitious among the Palestinian Arabs only competed for the

leadership of the nationalist opposition and not to become part of the ruling

establishment.

In Lebanon, where the Christian political establishment (dominated by the

Maronites) was fully determined to make a success of the state, there too was a

Muslim opposition which was equally determined for it to fail. The ruling

establishment, secure with the support of the French spoke its mind freely and

acted accordingly, while the opposition with the moral backing of the prevailing

nationalist feelings in Syria and other Arab countries, did the same.

It was not only the Christian political establishment, but also the French who

wanted to make Lebanon a success; and France was fully alert to the countrys

fundamental problem; they knew that unless the Christians were able to convince

the Muslims of the idea of Lebanon, it as a state would not gain the legitimacy it

needed to truly be viable.

France (as a historical friend of the Maronites) had done much for them, as

proven by their creation of the state as requested by the Maronites, albeit against

their better judgment.

Now it stepped to the plate to help them organize their state, and for a time

provided them with the needed power protection. Later, all that France could do

was to give advice, knowing that one day Lebanon would be on its own, so their

advice was given and in some instances pressed upon the ruling establishment.

Maronite leaders who accepted it, (showing prudence in speech and actions)

were given all the necessary support to reach office --- those who did not accept the

advice received no support. And of those who did not accept the advice and

happened to reach office, they were left in a political vacuum and eventually their

wiser opponents were assisted in bringing them down.

The original intent of the Maronites was to politically control Lebanon, as for this

when the country received its Constitution (May 23rd, 1926) and became a

parliamentary republic, and rather than a Maronite the French saw to it that a Greek

Orthodox Christian, Charles Dabbas, was elected as the 1 st president three days

after the adoption of the Constitution. The speaker of parliament was Sunni Muslim.

Nevertheless, the Maronites managed to secure all other key positions in the

government and its administration, and ultimately the presidency. What made this


6/8

possible (at its initial stages) was the effective boycott of the state by all but a few

Sunni Muslims, who were the only community in Lebanon who could have stopped

the Maronites from achieving their monopoly of power.

Step by step, the French saw to it that the effectiveness of this Muslim boycott

of the state erode, and pressed upon the Maronite leadership the necessity of giving

the Muslims sufficient stake in the country to promote the maintaining of Lebanon.

Too many Maronites, this stance by the French represented the outright betrayal of

their cause, others were willing to learn, although as noted not always as much as

needed.

Note: The 1st completed census and only official on in 1932 of Lebanon resulted

in the present system of selecting major political officers, this according to the

proportion of the principal sects in the population --- whereas the president was to

be Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of the

Chamber of Deputies, a Shia Muslim. In theory the Chamber of Deputies performed

the legislative function, but in fact the majority of the bills were prepared by the

executive branch and submitted to the Chamber, which passed them virtually

without exception. Under the Constitution, the French High Commissioner still

exercised supreme power, an arrangement that initially created objections from the

Lebanese nationalists.

At the end of Dabbass first term in 1932, Bishara al Khuri (Khoury) and

Emile Iddi (Edde) competed for the office of President, thus creating a division in

the Chamber of Deputies. To break this deadlock, some deputies suggested

Shaykh Muhammad al-Jisr, the sitting chairman of the Council of Ministers, and

the Muslim leader of Tripoli as a compromise candidate. The French High-

Commissioner Henri Ponsot suspended the Constitution on May 9th, 1932 --- and

extended the term of Dabbas for one-year, in this manner preventing the election

of a Muslim as president.

The French, dissatisfied with Ponsots conduct, replaced him with Comte

Damien de Martel who on January 30 th, 1934 appointed Habid Pacha Es-Saad as

the president for a one-year term, which was extended for another year whereas he

left the office on January 20th, 1936.

Emile Iddi was elected the President on January 30th, 1936 ---- and a year later he

partially re-established the Constitution of 1926, and proceeded to hold elections for


7/8

the Chamber of Deputies --- however, the Constitution was again suspended by the

French High-Commissioner in September 1939 World War II had commenced.

By-in-large the Christian communities of Lebanon had an advantage over the

Muslims, as their rank and file, being versed in the ways of the West, were socially

far more developed than their counterparts. This position placed them where they

provided (for a long-time) with the necessary tools to construct the need

infrastructure within Lebanon. And this advantage also provided the whole of

Lebanon with a social gloss, which in turn covered the fragile environment of

Lebanon. This social gloss enabled the country to operate within the tension which

lay underneath the (sometimes) glaringly uneven development of the different

Lebanese communities and regions. If you looked elsewhere in the Arab states this

kind of gloss was not to be found, with the exception of Palestine, where it is said

to have been provided by the Jewish settlers rather than by the Palestinian Arabs.

Besides all its faults the Lebanese country had a certain stunning natural

beauty, one to be desired by many. Lebanon with its mild Mediterranean climate

(whereas the mountains along the coast, backed up the clouds full of moisture) was

relatively green and during periods of the year would appear a lush green (a

veritable paradise) in contrast to the harsh desert which began once one crossed

the eastern borders of the Bekaa valley into Syria. Where else in the Arab world,

could you see majestic peaks capped with snow for much of the year, sprinkled with

red roof-top o the houses in countless villages nestled among orchards or vineyards

set against a blue sky, and overlooking the waters of the Mediterranean? They also

had a very experienced mercantile initiative (ever since the days of the ancient

Phoenicians) and again history has demonstrated an exceptionally adaptable core

of citizens in their generally exhibited cultural existence, especially in the coastal

cities, such as Beirut. And in addition to all this natural beauty and human

potential, an ideal gateway for the West to the Arab world!

All they needed to complete this example of a progressive and settled country

was a common political accord and to develop the observed social discord found in

some communities, they in most cases the most populated.

These two items (as time would show) proved to be the hardest to achieve, in

that the Maronites were determined to maintain their own paramount control of the

country, and were fundamentally unwilling to have Christians and Muslims share in

the country as political equals, their reason being that Muslims would naturally


8/8

fall under the influence of their counterparts in the Arab countries, and could not be

trusted with some of the sensitive political and administrative positions in

Lebanon. Secondly, the upfront mood in the Arab world, especially in Syria, was

against Lebanon achieving any sort of success, political or otherwise. The

Maronites felt this feeling projected into their Muslim population would keep

Lebanons political climate in a permanent state of chaos.

For the duration of the French mandate Lebanon was adequately protected

against such destabilizing Arab intervention the real problem surfaced as soon as

they left, leaving Lebanon at the mercy of external and internal forces acting in the

name of Arab nationalism with the Lebanese state, which in the long run, was

unable to come to reasonable terms.

As it can seen, from the beginning of its existence under the French

independence it had within its borders two competing forces; once labeled as

Arabism reinforced from external entities and acted upon by the internal Arab

population, while the other was labeled, Lebanism, and supported by the West;

and as they collided almost on a daily basis clouded every fundamental issue,

impeding the normal development of the state and in doing so, keeping Lebanons

right as a political legitimacy continuously in question and this issue has reared its

ugly head over the years to follow. Although it is true that there were individuals in

Lebanon who sincerely believed in its historical and political validity under

Lebanism, likewise there were individuals who believed in the value of Arabism with

equal sincerity --- but it can be also seen that it wasnt by accident that the

original proponents of Lebanism were almost exclusively Christians, just as it can

been observed that because of the opinions of the Arabic states surrounding them,

that the un-bending proponents of Arabism were Muslims.

While neither admitted to nor in fact wanted to, really addresses the reality of

their arguments that ran deep beneath the surface of everyday events, in other

words the real source of their problems.

Documents

Phoenicians - Chapter 24