As'ad
Abukhalil On
The Nahr al-Bared Siege
By Ali Abunimah
25 May, 2007
Electronic
Lebanon
Thousands
of Palestinian refugees are fleeing from Nahr al-Bared refugee camp
in northern Lebanon as five days of fighting by the Lebanese army and
a militant group known as Fath al-Islam has left dozens of soldiers
and fighters and an unknown number of civilians dead. As the situation
of these Palestinian refugees worsens, 59 years after they were first
expelled from their homeland into Lebanon, the world looks on in silence.
Electronic Intifada co-founder Ali Abunimah spoke with As'ad Abukhalil,
the creator of the Angry
Arab News Service blog. Abukhalil explained the origins
of Fath al-Islam, the events that led to the violence and what it means
for Lebanon and the region.
EI: What
is Fath al Islam?
ABUKHALIL:
We hadn't heard of Fath al-Islam prior to late last year. There have
been reports over the last two years especially after the withdrawal
of Syrian troops from Lebanon of a variety of extremist militant groups
who are sprouting throughout the refugee camps of Lebanon, and elsewhere
outside of the camps especially in northern Lebanon.
Some of the reports have
been filled with sensationalism and sometimes groups that the government
were complaining about turned out to have been funded by the Hariri
family, for example Asbat al-Ansar and Jund as-Sham in Ain al Hilweh
refugee camp, some of whose members later joined Fath al-Islam.
Fath al-Islam is clearly
or at least predominantly a non-Palestinian organization. Based on interviews
with their leaders that I have seen on television or in print in the
last few months we can discern the ideological shape of the organization.
They are extremist Sunni fundamentalists that have these general grandiose
fundamentalist goals that only appeal to the margins of the margins
of Islamic fundamentalist organizations. They denied links with al-Qaida
yet they speak with the same rhetoric and they do not hide their sympathy
if not affinity with al-Qaida.
EI: Is there
any evidence that the Hariri family funded Fath al-Islam?
ABUKHALIL:
We don't have evidence that the Hariri family did specifically fund
Fath al-Islam. But that still allows for two possibilities. We know
from Afghanistan the factor of blowback. Sometimes patrons may fund
a client and, over a period of time the client turns against the patron.
So the possibility exists, but I do not know of any evidence that Hariri
funded directly that particular organization. What we know for a fact
is that over the last several years, since 2000, and specifically since
2005 during the parliamentary elections, the Hariri family spent lavishly,
especially in northern Lebanon to recruit among the extremist, fundamentalist
Sunni organizations.
Some of the people in Fath
al-Islam who are fighting now were released in an unprecedented amnesty
in 2005 insisted on by the Hariri family because they wanted to win
favor among the Sunni fundamentalist organizations in Tripoli. So it
is very likely that some of these people are beneficiaries of Hariri
largesse in the area of northern Lebanon. But that doesn't mean that
the Hariris knowingly financed Fath al-Islam, although we know that
they funded fanatical Sunni groups some of whose members later joined
Fath al-Islam.
EI: Palestinian
refugees fleeing from Nahr al-Bared camp have been quoted in press reports
saying that Fath al-Islam militants had infilitrated into the camp over
the past year, that they were very separate and didn't have much contact
with the camp residents except to condemn them for smoking, or playing
music, or putting up posters. One of the things a refugee witness remarked
on was that the camp is guarded on all sides by the Lebanese army. He
wondered how these militants got in noting that they didn't drop in
from the sky. How would you answer that question?
ABUKHALIL:
I think it is certainly suspicious how all these people came into Lebanon,
and all indications are that they came into Lebanon legally. We are
not talking about infiltrations like those the American media talk about
in Iraq. So they came to Lebanon with their passports, came through
port entrances controlled by the Lebanese security forces and army and
settled in those camps, and as you rightly indicated all these camps
are under watch by the Lebanese army.
In an interview on Al-Arabiya
television on May 23, the Lebanese defense minister, Ilyas Murr, stated
that of the several dozen fighters killed in the battles, not a single
a fighter is identified as Palestinian. He said they are mostly Lebanese,
Saudi, Yemeni, Algerian, Tunisian, Moroccan and so on.
EI: What
triggered the violence in Nahr al-Bared?
ABUKHALIL:
That's where it gets really bizarre and raises a lot of questions. After
the assassination of Rafiq Hariri in February 2005, the Hariri family
did not trust the existing state security and intelligence forces, so
with supervision and funding from the United States as well as Saudi,
Jordanian and UAE support, they established their own quasi-militia
called the Lebanese Internal Security Forces. They also established
something called Jihaz al-Ma'alumat, the Intelligence Apparatus, which
does not have a mandate to exist under Lebanese law. Be that as it may,
they are now the most important security and intelligence forces in
Lebanon and they are marginalizing all the others.
Prior to the outbreak of
the violence, just the day before, the Hariri newspaper Al-Mustaqbal
reported on the front page about a bank robbery near Tripoli. The newspaper
said this was done by Fath al-Islam. One now asks, if it was known who
robbed the bank, why did the authorities not follow them on the spot
to arrest them?
According to the reports
I am distilling for your readers, the Hariri security apparatus were
apparently planning to do a spectacular raid on an apartment belonging
to Fath al-Islam in Tripoli, and they wanted to take credit in order
to impress the Lebanese viewers and they took along with them crews
from Hariri TV stations. Well, they went there on that particular day
to do the raid. It was botched from beginning to end. They were overwhelmed
by the handful of fighters of Fath al-Islam. That's when they called
in the Lebanese army. The Lebanese press reported that the Lebanese
army were not told about all this and were not briefed beforehand and
they just called them in on the spot after the Lebanese Intelligence
and Security Forces had botched the raid that was supposed to impress
the Lebanese public.
EI: What
has been the reaction to these events in Lebanon and are any groups
or parties condemning the bombardment of Nahr al-Bared camp?
ABUKHALIL:
As far as reaction in Lebanon this is one of the most painful elements
of this story at the personal level. I have never felt more isolation
as someone who speaks out on Palestine as I have felt in the past few
days. There is an overwhelming, unanimous competition by people and
organizations to rally behind the Lebanese army and to pay tribute to
the troops. Not a single political party in Lebanon has spoken out,
none, against the indiscriminate shelling of the refugee camp of Nahr
al-Bared. Hizbullah has taken a position in support of the army, as
has the Lebanese Communist Party, and other organizations. Of course
we didn't expect anything different from the March 14 movement, but
among the opposition it has been a competition of who can show more
support. General 'Awn, the main Christian opposition leader has been
totally, unconditionally supportive of the Lebanese army and its resort
to what is called the "decisive military option" -- which
means to allow the Lebanese army to enter or invade the camps.
EI: Why
is this the case?
ABUKHALIL:
First, I understand the Lebanese army was hit hard last summer. It's
morale and its prestige suffered tremendously because of the lack of
performance in the face of brutal Israeli attacks. Because there are
no unitary symbols for Lebanon, people always want to underline, well,
'maybe it's the army.' It can't always be baba ghanouj or hummus. It
has to be something more concrete. And this is why there is a rush to
support the Lebanese army.
Second, there is a general
racist attitude -- classical racism towards Palestinians -- and one
brave Lebanese columnist, Khalid Saghiyya wrote about this in al-Akhbar.
This is why it is easy for so many people to tolerate indiscriminate
attacks on Palestinian refugee camps.
This is not the first time.
Just like in Jordan there were all these chapters of bombing of the
camps culminating in Black September. Throughout the time I was growing
up in Lebanon there were all these attacks by the Lebanese army and
later by other militias. In 1973, when I was thirteen years old, Palestinian
refugee camps in Lebanon were bombed from the air by the Lebanese army.
There is a long record. This Lebanese army doesn't show muscle except
against defenceless Palestinian refugees.
Of course there is a Fath
al-Islam organization, as I have mentioned, but this is a small fanatical
group that could have been dealt with as a security matter. It didn't
require the firepower of the Lebanese army which certainly we didn't
know existed when last summer Lebanon was under attack by Israel, and
when the Lebanese army was mostly hiding, and watching as few hundred
Lebanese irregulars bravely resisted Israeli aggression.
EI: The
Lebanese government would certainly respond to you that they are not
targeting the residents of the camp and they have even made statements
that they understand that the group that they are targeting is alien
to the Palestinians in Lebanon.
ABUKHALIL:
What is so ironic is yes, they said all that and they said more. They
used the same words uttered by the Israelis when they bombed the refugee
camps in the West Bank and Gaza. It's the same language the US uses
in Afghanistan and Iraq: 'They are hiding behind civilians. They are
using civilians as human shields. Hitting civilians is a mistake, the
army cares about the civilian population.' All this propaganda of collateral
damage is being used by the government.
The Palestinians are also
weak regionally and internationally. There is no support for them among
Arab governments which explains why the Lebanese government was not
only willing and able to do what it did, but yesterday the official
statement of the Arab League not only offered support and expressed
"satisfaction" to use their own language, for what is happening
in Lebanon but offered military assistance as a reward for the shelling
of the camp.
EI: There
is clearly an American hand in this. We saw the Lebanese government
request military assistance, including ammunition and equipment from
the United States, as a direct response to the events in Nahr al-Bared.
How do you see the United States' role and let me broaden the question
a little bit. How are the events in Lebanon linked to what is happening
in Gaza and does the United States actually have a strategy for the
region? What is the big picture here?
ABUKHALIL:
Certainly there is a heavy-handed American role in all this. A mere
week ago the American Undersecretary of State for the Near East, David
Welch, was visiting Lebanon. He met in an unprecedented manner with
the commander-in-chief of the Lebanese army. This never happened in
the past. We do not know what was discussed but the Lebanese press --
even the press loyal to the government -- indicated how unprecedented
it was that Welch met with the commander-in-chief.
As far as the Americans are
concerned, we also have to note that first, there was an American official
announcement that the Lebanese government made a request for emergency
military assistance. And yet the Lebanese government promptly denied
that it made such a request. And later they are denying the denial.
Why are there these confused signals? What is being cooked behind the
scenes? I think the answer to that is we have to look at the map of
the Middle East to see the extent to which there are events that are
quite related to one another.
You look at Gaza and you
find that the American funded, financed and armed militias of Muhammad
Dahlan and [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas were tasked
with fighting and killing other Palestinians. You look at Lebanon today
and you find a Lebanese government financed, funded and armed by the
American government and they are doing the same. Palestine and Lebanon
have become more important not so much because of any attention that
the US administration is willing to pay to those places, but particularly
because of the failure of the American project in Iraq. So with victory
eluding Bush in Iraq there is a desperate attempt to make some progress
-- to use that cliché -- somewhere other than Iraq. And the places
favored are Palestine and Lebanon because in those places there are
US-armed and financed puppet militias that the US can use against its
enemies and the enemies of Israel.
EI: What
do the current events tell us about the direction of events in Lebanon?
The Israeli press, for example, keeps talking about another war this
summer. Are these opening shots as many people fear?
ABUKHALIL:
I am more of the opinion that this may be an indication that this conflict
might be an alternative to such a war. Neither the Israelis nor Hizbullah
are interested in a flare-up this summer at all. And I think what the
United States is willing and capable of doing is to push the Lebanese
government against the Palestinian refugee camps to disarm them, in
order to make Israel more secure from their own standpoint. Even that
would backfire because we have already seen that the Palestinian refugee
camps are quite angry at what is happening.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.