Resistance is not possible in weakness
Resistance is not possible in weakness. Mr. Alamolhoda has stated that Lebanon was once the bride of the Middle East, known as a center of debauchery and pleasure for Arab countries. However, today’s Lebanon has turned into the Qibla of Muslims, a center of aspirations, a symbol of religion, sacrifice, and selflessness in the path of God. He further asked if the people of Lebanon did not lean towards religion and did not sacrifice and resist in the path of God, would they still be dragged into chaos and bloodshed?
These points indeed require explanations. There is no doubt that what Israel does to the Lebanese is a crime. However, since he has brought up the bride of the Middle East, it is not bad to review the history of Lebanon, which Beirut was once called the Paris of the Middle East, to understand how Lebanon reached its current state. The bride of the Middle East has three hours of electricity a day, and of course, happiness has also left the lives of the Lebanese.
Lebanon is a rainbow of different religions, ethnicities, and cultures. Whenever these colors interacted based on peace, tolerance, and fairness and prioritized national interests while accepting differences, Lebanon progressed and became the beacon of Arab countries. A country with cultural freedoms and a balance of political forces, whose economy, particularly relying on tourists who, of course, travel for pleasure not only to Lebanon but to any place in the world, and not all of them are necessarily debauched and immoral, developed.
It had educated people with reputable universities and international festivals. It was a hub for intellectuals, architects, and artists, and here and there, one could see Muslims, Christians, Jews, Druze, even Buddhists and Hindus living according to Arabic, Western, and Eastern traditions. The roots of today’s problems in Lebanon, however, must be sought in the day when this model of tolerance and diversity gave way to devastating civil wars that erupted among major ethnicities and religions, killing 120,000 people and causing one million to migrate from the country between 1975 and 1990.
It was in the midst of this civil war that Israel seized the opportunity and, under the pretext of confronting the PLO and Palestinians residing in Lebanon, who were also involved in these civil wars, attacked Lebanon. Today, it might be interesting for historians to find the main culprit of this internal disaster, but I doubt it would be appealing to the people whose lives were destroyed. They look back at the lost opportunities and the good times that would have been ahead if it weren’t for that civil war.
Of course, the Lebanese tried to stand up again from the 1990s, but who doesn’t know how difficult it is to rebuild and reform, especially when bloodshed is involved? In the past five years, the situation in Lebanon has once again deteriorated. The economic crisis of 2019 is estimated to be one of the worst economic collapses in two centuries worldwide.
Again here, the main problem is internal: an enemy called the dysfunctional Lebanese government, which is one step away from a collapsed state like Yemen, and with chronic inefficiency and corruption, has caused national despair, unable to provide basic needs, pushing 80% of the people below the poverty line. Let’s not kid ourselves; when the indicators of power in a country are this weak, the resistance Mr. Alamolhoda mentions also falters.
In today’s world, the foundation of resistance is in power, not the other way around. When you’re powerful, the enemy won’t dare to attack. However, if you show weakness, your situation changes. Various indicators are sought for power, from soft cultural and diplomatic power and democratic governance to hard military and economic power. All these must be viewed together, and this is especially necessary for us Iranians. The same government studies say that the government in Iran is in a weak state, and between a weak government and a collapsed government, there is a short bridge like a fragile state such as Iraq.
Mr. Alamolhoda asked if the people of Lebanon did not lean towards religion, would they still be dragged into chaos and bloodshed? I don’t know the exact answer to this question, just as in civil wars, non-religious people did not stand against each other. However, I am sure that if Lebanon were a powerful and wealthy country, its elites would act based on national consensus, read national interests, and its people were prosperous and happy, Israel would not dare to look at it sideways. With these interpretations, if I were in Mr. Alamolhoda’s place, I would do my utmost to ensure the government of the medical practitioners is vindicated.