Lebanon: Forever at the edge of rebirth and extinction

I can’t see Lebanon escaping the present regional cycle of violence that has ravaged Syria and Iraq. I can’t see the country successfully navigating the treacherous waters of multiple governmental, constitutional and security crises and coming out the other end unscathed. But, I could be wrong; in fact, I hope I’m wrong. In what shape the country will emerge out of all this is anyone’s guess, and to give a guess is the best the best of us can do. Will we be another Somalia, another Iraq, another Syria or Afghanistan, in many ways parts of our country already display aspects of all of these and more.

Gone are the days of the Eisenhower Doctrine. Perhaps today we need a new doctrine, one that instead of “thwarting aggression” from nations under the fold of “international communism”, would end the Islamic State’s blood soaked reign of terror and others of its ilk. An ‘Obama Doctrine’ could focus on assisting nations under threat from terrorist groups that fly the banner of faith but display none, groups that claim to speak for a religion of mercy but show none, groups that have done all they can to twist religion to suit their own ends. But, in truth, no US Administration has ever turned against its own monstrous creation, in fact, many administrations have denied ownership of such creations. Many suspect the IS is a creation of the Western alliance which hoped to use it to finally oust Assad from power in Syria and remove Maliki from power in Iraq. One down, as they say!

Instead of serious assistance, Lebanon got a planeload of basic munitions, mortars and rifles from the US. Instead of offering the Lebanese State access to spy satellite data of terrorist dispositions in Arsal and the surrounding area, or access to UAVs to help locate the kidnapped Lebanese Army soldiers so a rescue could be mounted, the US conducted a PR stunt designed to show how much they care. Of course, no serious observer of US policy making could ever think the US was, is or can ever be serious about helping an army it probably sees as a potential future adversary and de facto ally of Hezbollah.

Suspicions point in one direction when observing the tactics of the Islamic State, a group bent of emptying large swathes of territory of ethnic and religious diversity, they point at a new imperialism, or imperialism in new garb. The US, NATO, the EU and Israel, have one group of firm allies in the region, they are the State and non-State actors that directly or indirectly fund, train and support the IS and other groups like them. These are facts and they are undisputed.

Back to Lebanon: this country always seemed to be on the verge of being reborn and at the edge of imminent extinction all at the same time. It always seemed to be struggling to hold back the tide of monolithic political and religious systems that never ceased to try and absorb Lebanon into their fold: Nasser’s Egypt and latter its creation Fatah, the Ayatollah’s Iran and its creation Hezbollah, Qatar and Turkey and the rebel groups they support in Syria.

Pan Arabism wanted an indistinguishable, flavorless amalgamated mass, it wanted to create a single national and political identity “from the ocean to the Gulf”. Many Arab leaders were suspicious that this was code for Egypt wanting to carve out an empire for itself. Iran, in its own way, wanted and still wants the same, but instead of Arab nationalism Iran’s long-term aims and aspirations are for a powerful Persian Empire surrounded by a compliant satellite State community united under the Persian banner and paying homage and pledging allegiance to Iran.  This is what powerful countries do.

Many in the Gulf today, ordinary citizens and some powerful people near the top of State hierarchies, probably dream of a single-faith Middle East unified under a strict Wahabi interpretation of Islam, maybe the IS is their ‘bulldozer’ meant to clear a path. What is undeniable, however, is that whoever was in control of the IS, if anyone was, has lost control of what has become an almost autonomous and self-sufficient terror movement. In fact, there is no denying that the IS is the most brutal and blood thirsty of all such movements in its pursuit of its goals, it is that reputation that allows the IS to project terror beyond its immediate military reach. The IS, it could be said, represents a major evolution in tactics and strategy and a major threat that few governments in our region are equipped to deal with.

Exposure to violence and uncertainty is a risk of living in a corner of the world that represents many different things to many different people. Global Zionism sees it as the promised homeland of the Jewish people; Christians see it as the cradle of their faith from which bullies must never evict them; Muslims see it as their national territory; the world’s industrialized nations see it as a source of energy and a strategic point on the map that links Asia, Africa and Europe, forming a vital land bridge for future invading armies.

This time the ‘invading army’ is partly homegrown; it is a mix of fanatical, passionate and foolishly misguided, but nonetheless idealistic and determined, young men eager to revive the glories of the past. Their motives are not so much religious as they are earthly: Most of these young Muslims joining the IS were raised in a post 9/11 world in which Islam has been routinely vilified. I can only imagine what that must do to a young Muslim teen born and raised in the West.

What, I wonder, will the future look like in their hands?