Her Journey in the Cave- Documentary Video

By Abir Chaaban

"Her Journey in the Cave" is a post-modern musical documentary that tells the story of a female academic/researcher in her late-forties. Abir is the main character. She is a citizen of Canada born in Kuwait to a Lebanese father. She experienced the Lebanese civil war during the eighties. She is working independently on a research project in Lebanon between the years 2010-2014. She is an Instructor of Political Communication at the Lebanese American University. This period produces the “Arab Spring “, a bloody conflict in Syria, one million Syrian refugees in Lebanon and a wave of terrorist attacks on Lebanese civilians.

Abir was a Radio/TV and Film student during the civil war. She had in her possession footage of Beirut when it was destroyed. She left Lebanon after graduating in 1989. The footage remained with her for 24 years. In 2014 it comes back to a full cycle where it is used to construct the contrast between destruction (1988) and construction of Beirut  in 2004 in a film about violence, peace and security in Lebanon.
The story  is composed of two parts. The first part is entitled “My Memory of the Past”. This part is at post production stage. It requires funding for professional editing and professional shooting and re-shooting of some scenes using professional equipment and a camera man. A rough cut using available footage is uploaded on YouTube.  It tells the overall story of part I. Abir's memory of the past is documented as flashbacks into images of the civil war, reconstructing the main events of the Lebanese civil conflict from 1975-1983. It uses music and musical lyrics of Pink Floyd the Wall and Micheal Franti as core to the development of the story between the past and the present. Flashbacks are constructed within an interactive dialogue emerging in class from student’s read assignments and the researcher’s reflections about the assignments.
The assignments dealt with three issues associated with conflict in Lebanon. The first issue is the documentation of history, the second is the construction of identity and the third is peace and security. Two generations stand in contrast. The first is the generation that experienced the civil war as children. Second is the generation that only heard about the war and lacks a comprehensive history book of the war.
Part II. of the film is called “Genealogies of the Construction of Race. It takes the audience to the present of Lebanon and associated sectarian mobilization as it develops with the Syrian conflict. It starts with wave of terrorist explosions that overwhelmed Lebanon. Abir then starts exploring the dichotomy between what the media paints as spring, and the deadly battles and racial mobilization in the midst of the burning of towns that had engulfed Lebanon and Syria.
The story develops as Abir moves into the journey inside the Syrian refugee camps in the Bekka Valley. Abir is working on the depiction of the historic identities utilized by the Islamist militancy to mobilize into conflict in Syria and the utilization of this discourse to recruit militants in Lebanon.
The emphasis is placed on the shift of the identity discourse from Arab and non-Arab as it was core to the Lebanese civil conflict to Shi’a and Sunni which is core to the Syrian conflict.

The Impact

The aim of this story is to establish a dialogue between two generations in a country that does not have a unified history book.  “My Memory of the Past” exposes the role of myth in the construction of identity by the narrative of Abir, of her experience of the past. The story takes the audience through out the First World War, going through the Holocaust and problematizes the concept of the historical nation-state and its relationship to displacement of population and ethnic cleansing.  It brings to the Lebanese youth issues that are not discussed within the locality of Lebanon, primarily the Holocaust and its relationship to the displacement of the Jews and the consequent problem of the Palestinian refugees. It leaves the audience with open questions and highlights the importance of peace as the only option for coexistence.
Part II. takes the youth to the present and demonstrates the role of historical discourse in the process of the mobilization of Sunni-Shi'a conflict in Syria. The idea is to get the audience out of the box of journalistic analysis of the conflict and bring to the front radicalism associated with any religious and ethnic conflict dividing the population into superiors and inferiors by the utilization of historical discourse of identity.
The target of this documentary is the youth that is disinterested in reading about history. This documentary aims to educate, and create awareness to the youth about the complexities associated with the documentation of the history of conflict, the destruction associated with conflict, and the threat Lebanese society faces today with the production of historical discourse aiming to mobilize into sectarian conflict. Informal research was conducted with a small sample of youth at the Lebanese American University, unanimously they desire more visual than talk. Thus, incorporating music and lyrics aims at simplifying the intake of complex historical information.

The Road To Peace

By Abir A Chaaban

The Jewish state claims a “right to exist” in Mandated Palestine. I am not going to argue if the Jews have this right at all. Since, in fact neither Moses, nor the Israelites or King David were Jews. Regardless to the Biblical argument, in the legal books of modernity of legal rights, every right has a corresponding duty. Thus, the European Jews had a duty to co-exist with the people that inhabited Mandated Palestine. This is not what the European Jews did.

Resolution 181(II), gave the Jews a Jewish state. It also gave the Arabs an Arab State. The Lower Galilee belonged to the Arabs. The Jews expelled 750,000 Palestinians from territories that were allotted to the Arabs in resolution 181(II). In 1949 Israel applied for admission to the United Nations. The General Assembly adopted General Assembly Resolution 273(III) admitting Israel to the United Nations as a member. Upon her application for admission to the United Nations, Israel pledged in its Declarations and Explanations to the General Assembly its commitment to implement Resolution 181(II) and 194(III). Thus, Israel formally consented to all the terms of Resolution 181(II) and 194(III), both legally binding upon Israel.

The Palestinians, that Israel calls terrorists had the right to self-defense and had the right to fight back to get what was originally theirs, not in history, but in Resolution 181(II). These Palestinians were actually fighting Jewish terror, which did not only target the Palestinians but also targeted the British Mandate.

The Jews were not satisfied. They decided to invade Lebanon and occupy Lebanese territories of the Upper Galilee ( South Lebanon) to protect occupied land given to the Arabs in Resolution 181 (II) in the Lower Galilee. The Jews were not defending the territories of the legally acquired Jewish state. They were occupying territories to defend territories to which the Jews did not have a legal right.

Hezbollah along with the Lebanese Resistance, which is composed of Lebanese nationalist and communist parties, brought liberty to South Lebanon. Hezbollah played the role of the defense of Southern Lebanon in times of a bloody civil war, that led to the collapse of the Lebanese Army and government along sectarian lines. Today it Hezbollah remains to be the only entity that is equipped militarily to defend South Lebanon.

The regional war between Israel, Lebanon and Syria war will not stop by lobbying Western states with the aim of calling an organization a terrorist organization, only because it threatens the existence of a state founded on illegal occupation and displacement of Palestinians. Name calling will not stop the war. It will not give the Jews any right to the Galilee. Only negotiations will resolve outstanding matters.

The condition between Syria, Lebanon and Israel is a condition of war. Peace was never achieved between these three states. The armistices of 1949 were based on the implementation of the terms of Security Council Resolution (73)1949. Armistice demarcation line was not meant to establish the boundaries between Israel and her neighbors. The Armistices were established to achieve a state of ceasefire following the 1948-1949 conflict. The object of Resolution was the peaceful negotiation of the territorial dispute and the refugee problem under Security Council Resolution (73) article 1, which calls for the implementation of General Assembly Resolution 194(III). 

The designation of one side that is involved in this war a terrorist organization indicates that globally the world intends to resolve the matter by war. Since in essence the parties involved in the conflict in the current day of conflict are Lebanese Hezbollah, Syria and Israel.

It is our choice to start negotiating for a just peace, or continue this war. A just peace is the peace that will get the Palestinians out of the camps and back to what is their right by law.  A Just peace cannot be based on Israel’s pumping natural gas from territories over which it is not sovereign and were annexed in 1949, while hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are living in camps since 1949.

Without the Lebanese Resistance, which includes Hezbollah, South Lebanon was never going to be free. This resistance will continue as long as there are displaced Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and Syria.  The road to peace would not be achieved by negotiating with the Palestinian Authority over sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza, when in fact this is not the cause of the war leading to the armistices between Syria, Lebanon and Israel, the sovereign states parties to this conflict.

Lebanon, Syria and Israel Politics: Book Chapter

Lebanon, Syria and Israel Politics: Book Chapter: Archeology, Genealogy and the Communication of Subjectivity: The Uses Made of Historical Discourse in Tactical Military Operations in...

Book Chapter

Archeology, Genealogy and the Communication of Subjectivity: The Uses Made of Historical Discourse in Tactical Military Operations in the Syrian Conflict (2013) 
(click on link above for full version)

by Abir Chaaban

Abstract

Archeology and genealogy are combined method of inquiry into the question of the how of power. In Society must be Defended Foucault aimed to methodologically de-scientify the theory of sovereignty by applying the combination of both methods. He first demonstrated archeologically the discontinuity of the conceptual formation of the concept of the legitimacy of sovereignty. Then he genealogically demonstrated the uses made of historical discourse to construct a discourse of an historical legitimacy of sovereignty. This discourse aims at constructing immediate identities of adversaries to tactically mobilize into conflict. In the midst of such conflict the state and its sovereignty were born. This study takes archeology and genealogy schematically as methods of inquiry into the question of the how of power. It brings into question the thesis of an assumed origin and continuity of a Sunni- Shī’a historical sectarian conflict that is being revived in Syria. This study takes three levels of analysis. The first level of analysis brings the assembly constructing the thesis of an origin and continuity of a historic sectarian conflict by institutions of knowledge, the media and think tanks into question. The second level takes the historical dimension to study the archeology of the construction of the constituent points assembling the thesis of origin and continuity. The aim is to genealogically release subjugated knowledges that were abstracted in the process of formal systemization of the origin and continuity thesis. The third level of analysis takes the historical discourse of militancy in Syria. The Salaf militants appeal to a discourse of superiors and inferiors, a sub race and an inferior race of Salaf and Shi’a to mobilize into battle. Foucault did not utilize his analysis into the currency of conflict. I take Foucauldian analysis into the immediacy of conflict.  I take internet and social media as discourse constructing antagonist sectarian identities around a historical content. I bring into play the subject speaking the discourse of news objectivity into the interplay of adversaries and allies mobilizing into conflict to de-scientify the hypothesis of the sectarian divide.

Al Assir, A Western Hero that turned out to be Al-Qaeda Terrorist Operating in Lebanon.

By Abir A. Chaaban

Sheikh Ahmad Al-Assir rise to the scene was timely. He shined with the outbreak of the Syrian conflict. He was the voice of the rebellion against what he called the Iranian order of Assad in Syria and his allies Iran and Hezbollah. Right at the start, Al-Assir's role was defined with clarity. His task was to instigate a Sunni-Shi’a sectarian ideological split by magnifying the issue of the Shi’a condemnation of Aisha, the wife of the Prophet over an incident that is 1400 years old. Playing with words was the simple, but magical game Al-Assir used. To play the words game and manage to gather the attention of some politicians, the media and a good number of Sunnis, he used a toy. To make a public appearance while lacking a powerful television station, Sheikh Ahmed Al-Assir appeared on Al-Jadeed holding a toy gun; he claimed the toy was given to Shi’a kids. The gun was alleged to say “go go kill Aisha”, the wife of the Prophet. Finding that the gun said “go and get the hostage” Al Jadeed apologized for not verifying what the gun said . On the same day a Hezbollah supporter with others tried to set fire on Al-Jadeed. The person arrested was caught in the fire and could not escape the scene.  Hezbollah officials interfered to set the accused free out of fear of civil unrest, they argued. Al-Jadeed then broadcasted a “Letter to Nasrallah” questioning the motives of Hezbollah when trying to bail a person who attempted to burn a television station with 300 employees in it. Upon the arrest of the Hezbollah supporter some Shi’a groups started to burn tires closing the airport road. This was the spectacular that introduced Al-Assir. 
Following this show, Al-Assir organized a "peaceful uprising" for the disarmament of Hezbollah. He closed one of the major roads in Sidon for months during the summer of 2012, when he started to gather popular attention. Al-Assir was covered by major Anglo-American media across the Anglo-American world. From the Alaska Dispatch  to the Belfast Telegraph  Al-Assir was talked about.  Robert Fisk called him the rebel Shiekh that defied Hezbollah . The West cheered the voice of the “ radical Sunni” that was voicing opposition to the enemy of the United States and Israel; Hezbollah, Iran and Syria. Al-Assir was the savior that would have made the American dream come true, only if he succeeded in starting militant operation against Hezbollah in the "Capital of the South and Resistance" Sidon. 

The Big Surprise

       On June 23, 2013, Al-Assir gunmen attacked the Lebanese Army killing two officers in the city of Sidon. A military operation involving Al-Assir and his gunmen in what is called Al-Assir’s security square, surrounding Balal Ben Rabah Mosque, in Sidon revealed the secret behind Al-Assir. Explosives, T.N.T, mines, and large quantities of weapons and ammunition were found at the Mosque. The Army intelligence collected lists of names of financiers, media personnel, teachers, activists, youth and students, and documents linking different entities to Assir. Al-Assir was armed. The injured and captured of Al-Assir’s militants included Syrians, Palestinians, Sudanese and Lebanese Salaf militants. Al-Assir was not peaceful. He was not planning a peaceful uprising against Hezbollah. Al-Assir was armed to fight Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army in the same manner as the radical Salaf militants are fighting the Syrian Army and government. Al-Assir is a supporter of Al-Nusra and Jund Al-Sham, both organizations are radical militant terrorist groups operating globally under the direction of Al-Qaeda. 
       As soon as the clashes started in Sidon, Syrian rebels, and Al-Nusra Facebook pages started a propaganda campaign associated with montages of images of the Army personnel operating along civilians with yellow arm-band  to create a rumor about Hezbollah's involvement with the Lebanese Army in an attack on the "Sunnis" in Sidon.  Thus, requesting Salaf support in mobilization of militants to help Al-Assir from other Lebanese territories. Syrian radical rebels Facebook pages started disseminating messages declaring the Lebanese Army a Christian-Shiite Army, and asking the Sunnis to defect from the Army.  Salaf clerics on T.V. and social media voiced their opposition to the Army for attacking the "Sunnis" in Lebanon. They argued that the Shi’a Hezbollah has arms and targeting "Sunni" Al-Assir was “discriminatory” and may instigate a sectarian war. In here the Salaf clerics are associating Hezbollah’s rockets with Al-Assir’s explosives and regardless to who is the target of the weapons in question, when it is clear Hezbollah's rockets cannot be used against Lebanese citizens inside Lebanon. 

       The escalation of the Sidon encounter against the Lebanese Army started immediately after the  Friends of Syria Doha Conference making a decision to arm the rebels in Syria. This was also a week after the G8 met to discuss the probabilities of arming the rebels. The G8 opted for the peaceful negotiation of the Syrian conflict instead of armament. This contradictory outcome was later explained by Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino as being the demand of regional powers that would like to see the issue in Syria resolved militarily.  
Clearly, Al-Assir was armed and was heavily armed, but not in Syria. He was armed in Lebanon. Only one day prior to the escalation of violence in Sidon Ahmad Fatfat of the Saudi backed Future Movement said in a statement broadcasted on TV  "we will fight Hezbollah's arms with arms." Fouad Siniora presented a statement to the President Michel Suleiman on June 22, stating that Future Movement refuses to form a government with Hezbollah. Today, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates declared that they will not recognize a government that includes Hezbollah.

       Of course we all know who armed Al-Assir. He is armed by the same Arab states that are arming the Syrian rebels, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.These are the same states that the United States is selling arms to so that they could in turn send to rebels. Thus, the objective of Qatar and Saudi Arabia in the Levant has become clearer, but what is the United States objectives for arming a terrorist like Al-Assir and assuming that Israel will stay safe after his arrival to the South. Of course, Al-Assir and Hezbollah are a threat to Israel. But Al Assir's immediate aim is to demolish Hezbollah, as well as, the national Armies of states that are allies to Iran by the mobilization of armed ideological mercenaries and the tactical use of propaganda to ideologically mobilize Sunnis into a sectarian conflict against Shi’a.For Israel, they could not have had a better deal than this. Let them kill each other is the strategy of this war.

Is Al-Assir a Sunni Shiekh? 
       Regardless, to the several statements made by the State Highest Sunni Authoritythe Grand Mufti Mohammed Rashid Qabbani declaring that Al-Assir is not a Sunni scholar and he does not represent the institutional Sunni Orthodoxy, Western media made Al-Assir a representative of the Sunni Orthodoxy that Al-Assir himself denies. The Salaf is a school of theology that emerged during the thirteenth century by its founder Iben Taiymiya. Its major opposition was the traditional Sunni Orthodoxy and precisely the Sufi and mystical orders of the Sunni Orthodoxy. The Salaf take the name “Ahl Al Hadith wal Al-Suna al Mowahidoun, which literally means the people of the Hadith and Sunna the monotheists.

The Salaf is a cult. The cult’s task is to define polytheism or shirk in the practices in other religions. If proven to be polytheist or  mushrik, the group can be a target of war and could be killed and massacred. Faith according to this cult is biological defined by birth into a sect, and thus only a declaration of separation from the birth sect will spare one of death. They follow strictly a set of Hadith (orally narrated saying of the Prophet) that was documented during the eighth century, as well as, interpretations of the Qur'an that were documented by Ibn Taiymiya and later Mohamed Iben Abd Al-Wahab (1703–1792). Both rejected the traditional Sunni Orthodoxy. In 1801 Abd al-Aziz Ibn Saud of the current day Saud family of Saudi Arabia supported Wahhabism. He ordered his tribesmen to attack the Shi’a holy cities of Najaf and Karbalaa. Karbalaa was sacked, and many Shi’a civilians were massacred. In 1803, in retaliation for this attack, a Shi’a assassinated Abd al-Aziz. Vicious ethnic cleansing crimes have been committed in Syria by the Wahabi Salaf, mostly targeted against the Shi’a and Alawite communities. Other crimes included traditional Sunni scholars that voiced opposition to the cult’s beliefs such as Al Bouti in Syria.

Al-Assir chose the points in history he wishes to use for mobilizing the "Sunnis" selectively. He stressed on points that recorded a historical conflict involving either the Partisians of Ali during the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, at this front his aim is to mobilize religious Sunnis, or Iran during the wars between the Safavid Empire and the Ottoman Empire, at this front his aim is to mobilize Sunni Arab nationalists. This he does by over emphasizing the Persianism of the Safavids and underplaying the Turkness of the Ottomans. Al-Assir's discourse was chosen superficially without an in-depth understanding of the contradictions implied in the context of each of these historical conflicts he is using, but he had ears to listen to what he had to say.
Al-Assir used nick names to describe the Shi’a. These nick names are echoed by most of Al-Nusra and "rebels" on their Facebook pages. You may also hear moderate and elitist Sunnis of education arguing an Assiri logic of history in some fancy restaurant in Beirut over a glass of wine. Secular Sunni elitists make reference to the Shi’a by using the term Zoroastrians from Iran. These are not Shi’a, these are Zoroastrians from Iran is a common justification used by Sunnis to agree with what Al-Assir was saying. Al-Assir reworked the direction of the enemy to make them non-Arab Persians, non Muslim Zoroastrians. His narrative tells the story of the Persian, Zoroastrian Safavids that installed a militia in Lebanon called Hezbollah to destroy Muslim “Sunni” Arab land of the Sunna. According to Al-Assir Sunni is about people-hood. It is not a scholarly school of theological thought.It is a biological and territorial ideology. Salaf clerics were calling to save the "Sunni" city of Sidon. Thus giving the city a sect. 

Al-Assir is the hero of the Syrian rebels. Shiek is a title that brings him close to Iben Taimiya himself. Noting, Iben Tayimia was imprisoned by the State and died in prison for promoting his violent thoughts against the state and other religious groups within the State.