Introduction
Lebanon, as a modern civil state, has long had difficulty in forging an inclusive national identity with which all its citizens can identify. The reasons for this are many, and include the country's religious, sectarian and political heterogeneity; considerable involvement of foreign and Arab forces in the country (mainly Syria) and exterritorial political loyalties of various Lebanese elements; and a history of civil strife.
This difficulty has recently found expression in a public debate over the content of the school history curricula.
The Sa'd Al-Hariri government (with Hassan Mneimneh as minister of education) formed a committee to draft a history curriculum for all Lebanese schools, public and private. The committee, which comprised historians and politicians from all the political streams in Lebanon, and worked under the supervision of The Educational Research and Development Center, formulated a unified curriculum meant to be acceptable to all the streams.
However, the curriculum came up for final approval only after the advent of the current Najib Mikati government, which is dominated by the March 8 Forces (the pro-Syrian camp, headed by Hizbullah). This government formed a ministerial committee to review the proposed curriculum, headed by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Nicolas Fatoush and including also Education Minister Hassan Diab, Culture Minister Gabi Layoun, Development and Administration Minister Muhammad Fneish, Health Minister 'Ali Hassan Khalil, Justice Minister Shakib Qartabawi, and Minister Without Portfolio 'Ali Qanso.
The ministerial committee introduced changes in the proposed curriculum, chief of which are the removal of any reference to the period since the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri in 2005, including the events of May 7, 2007, in which Hizbullah fighters took over large areas in Beirut and in other Lebanese cities; elimination of the term "Cedar Revolution" in referring to the 2005 campaign led by the March 14 Forces which ultimately led to the withdrawal of the Syrian forces from Lebanon about six weeks after the Hariri assassination; inclusion of content on Shi'ite clerics and activists who fought against the French mandate; and the designation of 1982, the year in which Hizbullah began operating as a Shi'ite militia in South Lebanon, as the beginning of the "period of resistance."[1]
March 8 Forces: Lebanese History Should Be Written "By Men of Honor, Not By Agents Who Want to 'Zionize' and 'Americanize' Lebanon"
Hizbullah's representative in the Buqa' region, former MP Muhammad Yaghi, shed light on the attitude behind these changes when he called upon the Education Ministry to "distance the writing of Lebanon's contemporary history from [the pagan idols] Adonis and Ishtar... because the history of the homeland [should] be written by men of honor and not by agents who want to 'Zionize' and 'Americanize' Lebanon... Those who shall liberate Lebanon [i.e. Hizbullah] are the ones who shall write its history, not those who follow [Western] orders [i.e. the March 14 Forces]."[2]
Culture Minister Gabi Layoun, from Michel 'Aoun's party, which is allied with the March 8 Forces, said that the Cedar Revolution should not be mentioned in school textbooks because it was supported by foreign elements, chiefly the US.[3]
March 14 Forces: Hizbullah Is Falsifying Lebanon's History
The actions of the March 8 Forces and 'Aoun's party angered various elements in Lebanon, especially the March 14 Forces. The daily Al-Mustaqbal, owned by March 14 Forces leader Sa'd Al-Hariri, accused these forces of trying to falsify Lebanon's contemporary history, and stated that Hizbullah was trying to stage a cultural coup, as a continuation of its political coup against the Sa'd Al-Hariri government in January 2011.[4] MP Nadim Al-Gemayel, of the Kataeb (Phalangist) party, which belongs to the March 14 Forces, said it was inconceivable that the history of Lebanon should be written by those (i.e. Hizbullah) who do not believe in Lebanon's existence as a sovereign state. He added that Hizbullah must understand that the history of Lebanon and the resistance started before its establishment.[5]
Al-Mustaqbal accused Hizbullah of trying to erase a glorious period of the country's history, in which people died for the sake of Lebanon's independence in the war against Syria's military domination of the country (1990-2005).[6] Kataeb Central Committee coordinator MP Sami Al-Gemayel said that the Lebanese resistance movement included many Christians who fought against the Palestinians and against the Syrian occupation for the sake of Lebanon as a whole. Had it not been for their struggle, he added, Lebanon would have been transformed into an alternative homeland for the Palestinians, or else would have been annexed to Syria. He stated that this was a "crucial matter" for the Kataeb party, which could lead to "civil disobedience" on their part, and to a refusal to use the amended curriculum in their schools.[7]
Similar criticism was voiced by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who was part of the March 14 Forces until June 2011, when he joined the Mikati government. In his weekly column in his party newspaper, Al-Anba, he wrote that no political dispute justified an attempt to obscure the role of the martyrs from the March 14 Forces, and also hinted that the blood of the martyrs had paved the way for Michel 'Aoun's return to Lebanon from Paris.[8]
The March 14 Forces likewise attacked 'Aoun, pointing out that he had once strongly opposed the Syrian military presence in Lebanon and had been one of its victims, yet he was now allying himself with Syria's supporters, the March 8 Forces. Sami Al-Gemayel urged him not to let his present political alliances [with Hizbullah and Syria] cause him to forget his history.[9] In a January 30, 2012 editorial, Al-Mustaqbal attacked Culture Minister Layoun (of 'Aoun's party) for calling to remove the Cedar Revolution from the history textbooks. It said that 'Aoun and the members of his party suffered from a complex that caused them to make a pact with the enemies of Lebanon's independence, for which they had fought.[10]
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Nicolas Fatoush responded to these statements in a letter to Al-Mustaqbal. He wrote that the accusations published in the daily were preposterous and bordered on slander against the ministerial committee and its head (even though the statements published in Al-Mustaqbal were first published in the daily Al-Safir, affiliated with the March 8 Forces). He added that the committee's decision had been objective rather than political, and that the recent period had been struck from the textbooks because writing history required a perspective of time. He said that no changes had been made to the content or goals of the curriculum, apart from the addition of small details, such as the names of certain figures.[11] The daily responded by reiterating its position that the decision was political.[12]
On February 1, 2012, the March 14 Forces secretariat decided to form a committee that would follow the affair and inform the public.[13] The Kataeb party and the Free National party (likewise a member of the March 14 Forces) went even further: On March 10 they held a demonstration in front of the government building in Beirut. The security forces responded with violence, and several protesters were injured.[14] The police violence evoked condemnations, and Prime Minister Mikati said that he would not approve any history curriculum that was not acceptable to all sectors.[15]
Additional Hizbullah Efforts to Influence the Curricula
Attempts by the resistance camp to influence the curricula unilaterally were not limited to the issue of history studies. On February 13, 2012, as part of "resistance week," Culture Minister Diab instructed all schools and institutions of higher education to dedicate a study period to the topic of resistance.[16] The president of the Lebanese University, 'Adnan Al-Sayyed Hussein, who is close to Hizbullah, announced that he intended to make changes in the university's academic faculty, in disregard of the system of sectarian representation customary in Lebanon.[17] On December 3, 2012, the website of the Kataeb party reported, citing residents of the Ba'albek region in the east of the country, that Hizbullah was forcing schools in the area, including Christian ones, to teach about the Shi'ite sect as part of their religious studies curriculum, and that residents object to this but are afraid to express their opinion.[18]
SUPPORT OUR WORK
Like the history curriculum amendments, the Education Ministry's decision to introduce a study period on resistance sparked objections from various quarters. Students at the Lebanese University, supporters of Samir Geagea's Lebanese Forces party, stated in a communiqué that Hizbullah and its allies were using their positions of power to market the idea of resistance to the Lebanese public. The communiqué mocked Hizbullah's notion of resistance, saying that it had dragged Lebanon into needless wars and gained imaginary victories, while bringing complete destruction upon the country and undermining its sovereignty.[19] The daily Al-Mustaqbal attacked Lebanese University President 'Adnan Al-Sayyed Hussein (who had announced he would change the makeup of the university faculty). The daily accused him and Education Minister Layoun of harming Lebanon's ancient and modern history.[20]
Conversely, two Hizbullah MPs, Nawwar Al-Sahili and 'Ali Fayyad, praised the Education Ministry's decision and attacked its opponents.[21] The ministry itself explained that resistance was at the heart of the curriculum, and that the instruction to devote a study period to this subject was only a recommendation, to be adopted by institutions that chose to.[22]
Al-Safir: History Should Not Be Exploited for Political Purposes
A point of interest is the position taken on this issue by the Lebanese daily Al-Safir, which is close to the March 8 Forces. Surprisingly, the daily published several articles condemning the attempts of Hizbullah and its allies to change the history curriculum according to their lights. The harshest of the articles, by columnist Suleiman Taqi Al-Din, said: "Imposing control over [the writing of] history is characteristic [of forces that] take over the government. When the government lacks sufficient legitimacy that would guarantee it the willing loyalty of wide [sectors of society], it tries to deprive people of their memory and control their thoughts. If the government is unable to revoke and erase the past, it changes the past in ways that serve its goals... In trying to write a unified [account of] Lebanese or Arab history, we must incorporate the different shades [of the ideological spectrum], not usurp history and hijack it [just because] the power balance [allows us to do so] and according to the principles of totalitarianism... Since we have not learned from history, we are not worthy of writing it today."[23]
Columnist Wasif 'Awadha wrote: "Most of our ancient history was written by Orientalists, who were more realistic and neutral than our own historians... Either we leave it to the Orientalists to [continue] writing our history, or we remain a people without a history. [Both] are preferable to enslaving our history to political alliances."[24]
The daily's editor, Sati' Nour Al-Din, wrote that the issue of Lebanese history was a keg of gunpowder ready to explode at any moment. He contended that the curriculum proposed by the previous government's committee was well-balanced, but had apparently come too soon, because it encountered objections and demands that sabotaged the entire project. The demonstration held by the opponents of the changes and the unjustified force used against them by the security forces proved that Lebanese history was still volatile and that the sides were not yet ready to defuse the bomb, he said. Therefore, in order to draft a unified history curriculum, the Lebanese first had to reconcile among themselves and form a pluralistic society.[25]
* E. Picali is a research fellow at MEMRI.
Endnotes:
[1] Al-Safir (Lebanon), January 5, 2012; Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 27, 2012.
[2] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), November 6, 2011.
[3] Al-Jumhouriyya (Lebanon), January 29, 2012.
[4] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 27, 2012.
[5] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), March 7, 2012.
[6] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 27, 2012.
[7] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 29, 2012.
[8] Psp.org, January 31, 2011. 'Aoun lived in exile throughout the years of Syria's military control over Lebanon, in 1990-2005.
[9] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 30, 2012.
[10] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 30, 2012.
[11] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 9, 2012.
[12] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 9, 2012.
[13] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 2, 2012.
[14] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), March 11, 2012.
[15] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), March 13, 2012.
[16] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 28, 2012.
[17] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), April 12, 2012.
[18] Kataeb.org, December 3, 2011.
[19] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 28, 2012.
[20] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), January 30, 2012.
[21] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), March 3, 2012.
[22] Al-Mustaqbal (Lebanon), February 28, 2012.
[23] Al-Safir (Lebanon), March 13, 2012.
[24] Al-Safir (Lebanon), March 12, 2012.
[25] Al-Safir (Lebanon), March 12, 2012.
