Lebanon is not merely a country; it is a message

By Chaden Hani

English translation by Jade Kassis

The news

The repercussions of President Trump’s announcement, on the 6^th of December 2017, regarding Jerusalem and the transfer of the American Embassy, have held prominent place of late in the Lebanese political arena. The announcement is widely viewed as having cancelled all previous efforts of peace initiatives, as well as any aspirations Palestinians have had to establish a Palestinian state on the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip – both of which were occupied in 1967.

The repercussions of the news

Following this announcement, Lebanon witnessed movements in Beirut, among other areas, including Palestinian camps, that protested President Trump’s decision and supported the Palestinian cause. The event was accompanied by a series of statements made by a large number of politicians, notably the Lebanese President, at the Extraordinary Summit Session of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, called for by Turkey, to discuss the Arab position. Lebanon, through the speech of its president, emerged as the “country-message”, as once described by Pope John Paul II. The president called for a clear approach toward a solution, suggesting the following procedure:

• To submit an urgent complaint to the Security Council and the United Nations on behalf of the group of Muslim nations, to hamper the US decision and force the United States to retract it.
• To undertake a diplomatic campaign to increase the number of countries recognizing Palestine as a State and as a full member of the United Nations, taking the necessary legal, political and diplomatic measures to adopt East Jerusalem as its capital.
• To take unified, gradual, diplomatic and economic punitive measures against any state that leans toward recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
• To call on the peoples of Arab countries to form a popular front that reinforces the political and diplomatic pressure placed by their governments.
• To adhere to the Arab peace initiative with all its contents without compromise, and to agree on an honest international broker to work on activating it.

On another front, a Prime Ministerial statement noted that the Lebanese government decided to “set up a special committee to study the proposals of Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil on the establishment of a Lebanese embassy in Jerusalem and the appointment of East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine.”

Further, The Supreme Council of the Evangelical Community in Syria and Lebanon denounced US President Donald Trump’s decision. The statement stressed that the city of Jerusalem is to remain an open city for all religions and the capital of the State of Palestine.

On the other hand, the Islamic-Christian Spiritual Summit held a meeting at the Patriarchal See in Bkirki, under the title “Victory for the cause of Jerusalem,” where it considered the issue of Jerusalem a Christian, Islamic, and national matter that transcends petty politics, after some had tried to give it a sectarian, or a purely Palestinian nationalist, character. All positions rejected the Judaization of Jerusalem and decisively recognized it as the city of the three heavenly religions, “Christianity, Islam and Judaism.”

During the Summit, the head of the Supreme Islamic Shiite Council, Sheikh Abdul Amir Qabalan, made a speech where he conveyed, “we are one nation, we draw strength from God, and are guided by His path; we bring victory to the oppressed and put an end to oppressor.” He added that “we are one nation and I am represented by Michel Aoun and Gebran Bassil on the subject of Jerusalem.” Sheikh Qabalan also expressed that Lebanon might seem small and weak but it is strong in its unity and its diligent work toward justice.

Theological Perspectives

God is working. Despite the darkness surrounding the fate and future of the Palestinian people, there remains hope in Arab unity. We observe this unity today in the initiative undertaken by the Lebanese Christian President at the Islamic summit, as well as in the unity of the parties in Lebanon that met to support the Palestinian cause, disregarding their sectarian and political differences.

Can the Church today employ this unity, so that it would not fail as other Arab attempts have failed through history? How can we move forward from our unity for Palestine to achieve a unity of thought, heart, and peace for the City of Peace that is proclaimed in the Bible? What choice do we make today? Do we advocate for the Palestinian people to be saved through violence or through unity and the rejection of violence?

Recommendations
It remains our responsibility as the people of God to strive toward achieving His Kingdom through the work of the local and global Church in peacemaking among the Arab peoples in the Middle East.