United by Disgust, Lebanon Demos Search for Shared Future

Anti-government protesters in Lebanon. (AP)
Anti-government protesters in Lebanon. (AP)
TT
20

United by Disgust, Lebanon Demos Search for Shared Future

Anti-government protesters in Lebanon. (AP)
Anti-government protesters in Lebanon. (AP)

Lebanon's massive street protests have made it clear what the demonstrators oppose -- with the entire political class in the crosshairs -- but the focus is now turning to what exactly they stand for.

The almost one-week-old protests sparked by a tax on messaging services such as WhatsApp have morphed into a united condemnation of a political system seen as corrupt and beyond repair.

The movement's soundtrack has been a chorus of inventive chants calling out politicians from all sects and parties with rhyming insults.

Most people want the unity government, which is supported by nearly all Lebanon's major political parties, to resign, and disgust with the status quo has been a unifying force.

But what they want next often differs.

On the outskirts of another rally in Beirut, when tens of thousands again brought much of the capital to a standstill, teenager Peter Sayegh and his friend Andrew Baydoun were playing cards on a plastic table.

They agreed that Prime Minister Saad Hariri has to go, but not on the future of Lebanon, said AFP.

"I want the people to rule and give us our rights, secure work for the country and secure my future so I won't have to emigrate," Sayegh said, leaning back on his chair while clutching a Lebanese flag.

Baydoun objected.

"The whole government needs to go and be replaced by a military one," he argued, calling for 84-year-old President Michel Aoun, a former army chief, to stay on.

Scuffling over the future

Lebanon is marked by stark political and sectarian divisions.

Many of its political leaders today were warlords fighting along religious lines during Lebanon's brutal 1975-1990 civil conflict.

The government is set up to balance power between multiple sects, which include different Christian groups, Sunni and Shiite Muslims, as well as the Druze.

But it often entrenches power and influence along sectarian lines.

The protests have been overwhelmingly apolitical, with all party and religious symbols abandoned in favor of the cedar-stamped national flag.

They have also been inclusive -- with no specific stated goals, or leadership or management structure.

But the bottom-up structure also poses risks -- with fears that the momentum could slip away as people feel pressure to return to work or school.

Numbers of protesters have declined since peaking Sunday, which is weekend in Lebanon.

Mass protests in 2015 ultimately failed to achieve major change and elections in 2018 ushered in the same sectarian parties.

In 2016, a non-sectarian coalition called Beirut Madinati (Beirut is my city) came close but ultimately fell short in city elections.

In the general election two years later, the group was part of a coalition that won only one seat.

'Demands later'

On Monday, Mona Fawaz of Beirut Madinati gave a brief speech in the center of the capital, stressing she was not claiming to represent the entire protest movement.

Yet parts of the crowd accused her group of trying to hijack the demonstrations.

"Go and speak in ABC," one protester yelled, accusing the group of elitism by referring a high-end shopping mall in Beirut.

Speeches on Tuesday evening concentrated on points of agreement: calls for the government's resignation and reclaiming public funds embezzled by politicians.

Nizar Hassan, 26, part of a leftwing group called Lihaqqi (for my rights), said the protest movement had to be realistic.

"This is a popular uprising, you can't just say: 'These are the demands.' But a lot of people are talking about things that are actually quite achievable," he said.

For Hassan, an interim government of technocrats could stabilize the economy ahead of new elections in which the traditional parties would be obliterated.

"In 2015, people were talking about overthrowing the sectarian system altogether. (Now) people are much more knowledgeable of the limits," he said.

Carmen Geha, an assistant professor at the American University of Beirut, said the new protests had support across economic groups and throughout the country.

"Leaderless movements can dissipate and be co-opted," she warned.

"There is a need to frame the demands. But right now, this is a popular protest -- go to the streets now and talk demands later."



Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
TT
20

Israel Wary of Egypt's 'Military Infrastructure' in Sinai: Peace Treaty at Risk?

Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)
Egyptian army chief Ahmed Khalifa inspects troops near Israel's border late last year. (Military spokesman)

Israel has voiced growing concerns over Egypt’s military presence in the Sinai Peninsula, fearing a potential escalation between the two sides amid the ongoing Gaza war.

Israeli media reports said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has asked both Washington and Cairo to dismantle what it describes as a “military infrastructure” established by the Egyptian army in Sinai.

However, an informed Egyptian source and experts cited by Asharq Al-Awsat insisted that Egypt has not violated its peace treaty with Israel. They argued that Cairo’s military movements are a response to Israeli breaches of the agreement.

Israel’s Israel Hayom newspaper, citing a senior Israeli security official, reported that Egypt’s military buildup in Sinai constitutes a “major violation” of the security annex of the peace treaty.

The official said the issue is a top priority for Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, stressing that Israel “will not accept this situation” amid what it views as Egypt’s growing military footprint in the peninsula.

The official added that the issue goes beyond the deployment of Egyptian forces in Sinai exceeding the quotas set under the military annex of the Camp David Accords.

The real concern, he said, lies in Egypt’s continued military buildup in the peninsula, which Israel views as an irreversible step.

Moreover, he stressed that while Israel is not seeking to amend its peace treaty with Egypt or redeploy troops along the border, it believes the current situation requires urgent action to prevent a potential escalation.

Egypt-Israel relations have not seen such tensions since the outbreak of the Gaza war, particularly after Israel violated a ceasefire agreement with Hamas brokered primarily by Egypt. Israeli forces resumed airstrikes on Gaza last month and failed to fulfill their commitments to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor and Palestinian border crossings.

A senior Egyptian source dismissed Israel’s accusations, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that “these repeated Israeli pretexts ignore the fact that Israeli forces have violated the peace treaty, seizing control of areas where Egypt objects to their presence without the necessary coordination with Cairo.”

Egypt has the right to take all necessary measures to safeguard its national security against any threats, emphasized the source.

“Nevertheless, Cairo remains fully committed to the peace treaty and has no intention of aggression against any party,” it added.

Israeli forces seized control of the Gaza-Egypt border, including the Philadelphi Corridor and the Rafah crossing, in May 2024. Israel has accused Egypt of not doing enough to stop weapons smuggling into Gaza through border tunnels—an allegation Cairo has denied.

Under the terms of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas, which Israel later broke, Israeli forces were supposed to begin withdrawing from the Philadelphi Corridor on March 1, completing the pullout within eight days. However, Israel failed to do so and instead resumed airstrikes on Gaza.

Israel also announced the creation of an administration aimed at facilitating the “voluntary departure” of Gaza residents, a move Cairo strongly rejected and formally condemned.

Egypt has insisted that Palestinians must remain in their homeland and has put forward a reconstruction plan for Gaza and called for the implementation of the two-state solution. The plan was endorsed at an emergency Arab summit three weeks ago.

Media reports have indicated that Egypt responded to Israel’s control of the Gaza border by increasing its military presence near the frontier—an act that some Israeli officials claim violates the peace treaty and threatens Israel’s security.

Former Egyptian intelligence official Gen. Mohammed Rashad told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel itself violated the peace treaty by seizing the Philadelphi Corridor, controlling border crossings, and blocking aid to Gaza while seeking to forcibly displace Palestinians into Egypt.

“Every Israeli action along Gaza’s border with Egypt constitutes hostile behavior against Egypt’s national security,” said Rashad, who previously headed the Israeli military affairs division in Egypt’s intelligence service.

“Egypt cannot sit idly by in the face of such threats and must prepare for all possible scenarios.”

The Philadelphi Corridor is a strategically sensitive buffer zone, serving as a narrow 14-kilometer passage between Egypt, Israel, and Gaza, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea in the north to the Kerem Shalom crossing in the south.

Military expert General Samir Farag insisted that Egypt has not violated the peace treaty or its security annex in over 40 years, arguing that Israel has repeatedly breached the agreement and is attempting to shift blame onto Cairo.

“Israel is doing this to distract from its internal problems, including public discontent over its ballooning defense budget,” Farag told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“It also wants to deflect attention from Egypt’s reconstruction plan for Gaza and leverage its claims to pressure the United States for more military aid by portraying Egypt as a threat.”

Farag emphasized that Egypt’s actions are solely aimed at protecting its national security, adding: “There is no clause in the peace treaty that prevents a country from defending itself.”

“The so-called ‘military infrastructure’ Israel refers to consists of roads and development projects in Sinai.”

“The US has satellite surveillance over the region—if Egypt had violated the treaty, Washington would have flagged it. Moreover, security coordination between Egypt and Israel continues daily,” he explained.

Egypt and Israel signed their landmark peace treaty on March 25, 1979, committing to resolving disputes peacefully and prohibiting the use or threat of force. The agreement also established military deployment guidelines and a joint security coordination committee.

Meanwhile, US Republican Party member Tom Harb told Asharq Al-Awsat that Washington has received intelligence from multiple sources indicating that Egypt has amassed a significant military force in Sinai.

Israel considers this a breach of the peace treaty, which designates Sinai as a demilitarized zone to prevent surprises like the 1973 war, Harb said.

While the US fully supports Israel’s concerns, it also wants to prevent further escalation, as that would destabilize the region, he added.

Ultimately, Egypt must clarify whether its troop movements are aimed at threatening Israel or preventing Palestinians from crossing into Egyptian territory, he stated.