Lebanese Former President Emile Lahoud launched on Thursday a scathing attack agaisnt former Foreign Minister Fares Boueiz in wake of the revelations he made in a five-part interview he made with Asharq Al-Awsat.
He described Boueiz as a “spiteful minister” and rejected his claims that he was one of “Syria’s men in Lebanon”, instead stressing that he was its “strategic ally.”
“We respect various political views, but we must address some discrepancies in Boueiz’s remarks,” he stated.
Commenting on the dispute over sending the Lebanese army to the South after the Israeli attack in 1993, Lahoud revealed that Boueiz had suggested that the military be dispatched to prevent the “resistance” from retaliating against Israel.
Lahoud, who was then army commander, rejected the proposal.
“This was the first time that the army would have responded to such an attack and at our orders. Instead of allowing the government to play its role, the Higher Defense Council convened, with Boueiz present, to request that the military be deployed to the South to prevent the resistance from retaliating,” he went on to say.
Boueiz implied that this request was made at then Prime Minister Rafik Hariri’s suggestion, in coordination with then Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam and other Syrian officials.
“This was the first time that the ‘army, people and army’ equation was being consolidated,” added Lahoud. “Boueiz seemed to have forgotten, or deliberately overlooked the fact that he had contacted me and asked that the army be deployed to the South and that we shell whom he described as ‘terrorists.’”
Lahoud asked him at whose authority he was making such suggestions, the president or the defense minister? “Boueiz then became flustered and directly told me: ‘This is what Lebanon and Syria want.’ I replied that carrying out such a decision demands a meeting by the government so that it can sack me and appoint another army commander.”
“It turned out that the conspiring was not limited to Lebanon, but had kicked off in Syria, through Khaddam and Syrian security officials. When late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad learned of this, I paid my first visit to Damascus,” he recalled.
“He asked me his historic question: ‘Why didn’t you carry out a Lebanese order when you also knew that it was Syrian?’ I simply replied: ‘I was born to a family that rejects oppression and stands by the people in defending their rights, regardless of their sect or affiliations.’”
“There is no doubt that this meeting laid the foundation of the strategic relations I had with Assad. It was my sole visit in years, while Boueiz visited Syria over 30 times. He probably became distracted in appeasing the Syrians, neglecting his duties towards his nation,” Lahoud remarked.
Hariri’s assassination underscored that “Syria was right to choose us as a strategic ally,” he continued.
He explained that after the assassination, “officials with a political history like Boueiz’s were quick to jump to another political camp.”
“Boueiz himself revealed this when he detailed how he had headed in the same vehicle with former MP Walid Jumblatt to meet anti-Syria Lebanese figures, who viewed the assassination as the appropriate time to launch a coup against me,” Lahoud said.
Jumblatt had named Boueiz as a suitable successor because he was accepted by then head of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon Rustom Ghazale and what would later become the anti-Syria March 14 camp.
Boueiz had told Asharq Al-Awsat that Jumblatt suggested to him that the angry crowds that had gathered after Hariri’s assassination be directed to protest in front of the presidential palace to demand the ouster of Lahoud, who was seen as responsible for the security apparatus in Lebanon.
Jumblatt had reportedly informed Boueiz that he had received the approval over his presidential candidacy from Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and the Syrian leadership.
“They won’t remove Lahoud from power, but they wouldn’t mind if he were to be ousted by the protests,” Boueiz told Asharq Al-Awsat. The condition was that the new president would not be at odds with any party and Boueiz appeared to fit the role.
Another discrepancy noted by the former president in Boueiz’s interview is related to how he was named minister during Lahoud’s time in office.
He revealed that his appointment came at the request of late President Elias Hrawi, Boueiz’s father-in-law, “who confided in me that this issue was causing him a problem with his wife and daughter.”
Hrawi essentially asked that Boueiz be named a minister at his personal request.
“I agreed even though my relationship with Hrawi was never good. I gave my approval and contacted Hariri, who rejected it. He said that he had no need for Boueiz, whom he said: ‘Hates me.’ I told him that I had given my word to Hrawi and intended to keep it.”
“Boueiz asked to be re-appointed foreign minister, but I turned him down and he ended up being named environment minister. When Boueiz asked me about this, I told him to talk to Hrawi, who knew the whole truth,” Lahoud said.
On his ties to Syria, Lahoud said: “They were always strategic. I had a few meetings there when I was army commander and later president. But we did meet when it came to the strategic vision and common interest without need for coordination and of this we are proud.”
“Moreover, we are proud of the technical approach - to use Boueiz’s words - I adopted when I was army commander. If it weren’t for this approach, the military institution would not have been unified,” after the civil war, he explained.
“We rebuilt the army in spite of attempts by several politicians, including Boueiz, to politicize military appointments and drag the army into political affairs,” he stressed.
Another point criticized by Lahoud was Boueiz’s “insistence” on describing him as one of “Syria’s men in Lebanon.”
“We declare that we are and have always been strategic allies to Syria and we are proud of that. Boueiz’s relations with Syria were based on personal interest, such as when he contacted Ghazi Kanaan to cut off electricity in Keserwan so that he would win against Henri Sfeir in the parliamentary elections,” he recalled.
“A lot of statements were made in the interview with former minister Boueiz,” said Lahoud. “We will make do with this reply because the Lebanese people’s concerns are elsewhere, and they don’t care about the sensational tales of a spiteful former minister who believes I had deprived him of a position he was promised.”
