Who cooks poison for Mr. President?

A Lebanese friend of Asharq Al-Awsat readers blamed me. He said: “You go to Berlin to write about the conditions of Ukrainian and Syrian refugees. Do you think our conditions are better than theirs? Have you not been told that cancer medicines are missing? And that the number of those digging for garbage to respond to hunger is increasing every day. And that the Lebanese were thrown into (the death boats) and lost their bodies outside their homeland. And the houses are almost empty from their youth. And that the meal of humiliation is the only fatty meal as the meals were reduced and the bread became firm?
He added: “Zaatar man’oucheh sells for twenty thousand pounds, and the falafel sandwich is forty thousand. One kilogram of tomatoes is forty thousand. The minimum wage is the price of four cans of gasoline and four kilograms of meat. They robbed the citizens’ deposits. They plunged the country into darkness. They killed the university, the bank and the hospital. Ukrainians have a Western embrace that will rebuild their country. They have Zelensky to raise their voice and rebuke the conscience of the world. We do not have one. Our headquarters is vacant, even if men and consultants enter. I advise you to visit the place. “The visit can be a farewell, because Lebanon can end before the end of Michel Aoun’s era.”
In the fall of 2016, the Lebanese Parliament elected General Aoun as President of the Republic. The election was a kind of approval of a coup represented in setting up a long vacuum in the presidential palace and determining that Aoun be elected alone to fill the vacuum. In those days, my Lebanese friend fell into some optimism. I believe that the “Hezbollah” that brought Aoun to the presidency, as his ally and most representative leader among Christians, will not allow his ally to fail. He expected that the first year of the new era would mark the birth of a “defense strategy” that would restore the image of the state and security and its constitutional institutions. He also expected the party to give a valuable gift to Aoun by not using Beirut as a platform to support the open Iranian fist in the region. And he believed Aoun deserved such gifts in light of the position he held in connection with the assassination season, the siege of the Grand Serail and the events of May 7th. And here the covenant has almost passed without the arrival of the gifts that might have saved the Aoun era from the title “the era of the great collapse.” I did not share the extravagance of my friend’s optimism, but wished the general success in the palace.
The truth is that Aoun’s story is long, sharp and painful. His popularity can not be denied, and his ability to catch savagery and delinquency can not be ignored. He was an officer who despised poor legitimacy and hid a coup under his olive clothes. He trained in the barracks on the illusion of a savior, the contempt of civilians and “cheese eaters.” The habit of Maronite politicians and their generals was struck by the “curse of the palace.”
Staying in exile deepened Aoun’s sense that the palace was being robbed of him. It was stolen when given to President Elias Hrawi and extended his stay there. It was also stolen when it was given to General Emile Lahoud. When Rafik Hariri’s remains were dismembered, the general returned from exile and the symptoms of a savior and the “curse of the palace” increased. He swam from the shores of Bashir Gemayel to the shores of Hassan Nasrallah and awaited his meeting with the dreams of the presidency and the alliance of minorities and others. His grief doubled. He saw that the palace was being robbed again for the sake of a general named Michel Suleiman. He ran out of patience. Age is treacherous and runs away between the fingers.
About six years ago he had the opportunity, as he played the role of dismantling the climate of “March 14”, but also the role of cover. The great emptiness of the palace alarmed the opponents of his arrival. Saad Hariri, Walid Jumblatt and Samir Geagea agreed to take the bitter drug so that we would not call it the cup of poison. Only Nabih Berri refused to take the medicine and there were those who whispered that day that Hezbollah’s engagement stops when Aoun arrives and does not mean to pay the price for his success. To ensure the realization of the dream, the general agreed to enter the palace after passing through the “Beit Al-Wasat”, “Clemenceau” and “Maarab” crosswalks, despite the chronic lack of cordiality between him and the owners. from the three crossings.
At the beginning of the era, there were those who believed that Aoun would seize the historic moment to restore a measure of balance in the Lebanese structure, to restore the image of the state and to restore part of the atmosphere of the presidency, regardless of the boundaries of power. . There are those who believed that Aoun would get back some of what had been stolen from the state. And that it will be a meeting point and will contribute to easing Shiite-Sunni tension. And that it will be a bridge of dialogue between “Hezbollah” and “Lebanese Forces” and that it will distance its actuality and cuisine from the greed of ministerial posts and administrative appointments.
The Lebanese did not find help from former president Aoun, who was calling for the state of institutions and threatening to turn the tables to fight the corrupt. During his reign, the funds of the citizens evaporated and Lebanon lost the relations on which it had relied during the difficult hours. He has so far cohabited with Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh, whom Lebanese are entitled to see before a fair court to answer for the bizarre costumes he designed, with the approval of successive governments and parliaments, and contributed to the terrible collapse.
The sad and painful story of the general for his country. He was content that the “strong covenant” would come out with two heads, and the ambitious groom did not spare the merit of the man who invented it. Poverty ate Lebanese meals and young people carried their bags to God’s spacious place. Lebanon lost its stability, prosperity and meaning. I know many powers would have liked to see Aoun fail. But what is certain is that the general’s major blow came from within the ranks that are dependent on applause and incense. The deadly poison meal was prepared in the palace itself and in the district that seemed foreign to the realities and balances of Lebanon and the importance of restoring the state to prevent complete death.
In the parliamentary elections, not a few Lebanese sent a message of protest against the great collapse and the style of the president. The results showed a rate of decline in his credit within his sect and nationally. Does Aoun read the letter and condemn the poisonous kitchen next to it, or just shake the “criminal gaze” as the Covenant announces its final months? Holding Aoun solely responsible for the Lebanese catastrophe is a great injustice, but releasing him from responsibility is also a great injustice. The date of the palace with the general is late. He was elected president of an exhausted palace in a weary republic.

Leave a Comment