Current situation
Whether the Lebanese like it or not, Lebanon's stability, security and independence is tangled with the internal, regional and global problems. One of the most important variables that can cause lot of instability is the status quo of the Palestinian camps. The Palestinian problems along with the Lebanese problem are inseparable. So, until a clear picture emerges from the Palestinian Israeli peace negotiations and the 2007 Annapolis Conference, the Palestinian camps constitute a military, social, and political problem for Lebanon. Furthermore, what makes the Lebanese situation worse, is that there is no solution on the horizon for the political deadlock. The Arab and French initiatives did not succeed; sadly this is due to some internal parties who have external alliances that dictate each move or speech they perform.
So, until an Israeli and Palestinian Peace settlement is reached, and Hamas and the Palestinian authority reconciliation happens; the worst nightmare scenario that can hit Lebanon after the Arab summit, is dragging the Lebanese army into internal battles with different groups residing within the Palestinian camps.
History showed that the "Cairo agreement", signed on Nov 3 1969 between Lebanon (General Emile Bustani) and the Palestinians (Chairman of the PLO Yaser Arafat), had a very negative effect on the Lebanese internal and external political arena. This agreement gave the Palestinian commandos the right to carry arms within the camps and to conduct arm operations against Israel from the south under the knowledge of the Lebanese army.
The presence of these armed commandos aggravated the political situation further and affected the Lebanese government both internally and externally. Internally, the Palestinian militia threatened the sovereignty of the country, by imposing their own laws, harassing the Lebanese population, and trying to expand their authority beyond the boundaries of the refugee camps. Some Palestinian factions abused the generosity and support of the Lebanese, and threatened the sovereignty and security of the country by creating a state within a state. Externally, the continuous Palestinian operations against Israel from the south, without the consent of the Lebanese government, were a pretext for Israel's retaliation against Lebanese citizens and the refugee camps.
Due to this agreement, security is the responsibility of the Palestinian arm forces, and the Lebanese army has no authority within the camps or to monitor the flow of arms to these groups. This void left the internal arena of these camps open to any terrorist's cells and mayhem. This created strong negative feelings among some of the Lebanese, who rejected the free hand given to the Palestinians and thus ignited the first spark for a long civil war in 1970's. Some Lebanese sects used the agreement, to their political and social advantage. This in turn, brought lawlessness within the camps and around it. During the 1970's, Lebanon became troubled by political and social volatility. It had lost its neutrality and could not prevent the evolution and establishment of militias by different religions and political ideologies.
The impact of the Palestinian and Israel's ferocity and intervention within Lebanon and on the borders changed the balance of power, and the political behavior of internal political parties. Lack of government control over the Palestinians commandos and their Lebanese supporters, resulted in an increase of militant attacks internally and externally, subsequently the political stability declined drastically. The plurality of the Lebanese society was threatened and the government found itself in a dilemma: either defend its borders against Israel, or eradicate the PLO military activities from the south. The Lebanese government chose the latter. This option resulted in confrontations in the civilian areas around the refugee camps in Beirut.
The Lebanese army along with some internal groups fought the Palestinian resistance who had the support of various Lebanese factions, hoping to change the Lebanese status quo to their political advantage.
As the two blocks polarized, various sects were also organized into armed militias. These sects then chose the block they wanted to ally with and the friction grew until, in 1975, the civil war finally erupted. After 1976, the Lebanese government was unable to control the rapidly developing tension between the internal groups or to prevent Israel's hostile actions against the PLO or the Shiites in southern Lebanon. These hostile actions resulted in Lebanon becoming a battleground for internal and external political players and it was transformed from a neutral country into a confrontational nation.
So history does not repeat itself, certain measures and new agreements should be drawn between the Lebanese government and the Palestinian factions who are residing in the camps.
One of the most important factors that can lead to civil strife within the camps ; is the domestic dispute and split between Hamas and the Palestinian authorities which can spark internal war in the Palestinian camps and spread throughout Lebanon. At this stage any political turbulence would create a volatile situation on the ground.
Lebanese political leaders should address the root of the problems. Due to their apathy and lack of co-operation to elect a president, and create an efficient government and reactivate the parliament, the country may enter into a murky era. One of the most important factors that can create a volatile situation internally is lack of precautions, and security. The country has been in a political dilemma that may lead to chaos and violence. A political compromise should be reached between March 8, and 14. Also, brave decisions should be taken from both the Lebanese and Palestinians leaders concerning the status quo of the camps. They should prevent the camps to become a fertile terrain and a hub for terrorists and criminals.
Sooner or later the Lebanese political rivals have to address the status of the Palestinian camps in Lebanon. They can't use the settlement of the Palestinian refugees to score against each other politically, disregarding the terrible consequences that will occur if both of them use the issue of the Palestinians in the Lebanese equation to their advantage. Granting citizenship to the refugees will create a huge setback especially for the Lebanese social fabric (foundation), and can tip the balance of power in Lebanon.
The biggest obstruction that needs closer scrutiny is the military, economic and social status of the Palestinians camps. The Lebanese leaders need to focus on each issue separately so Lebanon will not slither and stay intertwined in the troubles of the Middle East.
Security is the backbone of any sovereign, independent country, and should be the responsibility of the Lebanese government. That is: security of every street, corner, quarter, district, borders and most important the Palestinian camps. With the political deadlock, lack of security and stability in Lebanon, a road map should be introduced very soon and implemented. This road map will ensure the safety and welfare of the Palestinian refugees and implementing it will guarantee that the camps will not be a thorn in Lebanon's sovereignty and security.
Security of Lebanon and the camps
On 21 May 1987, the Lebanese Chamber of Deputies cancelled the Cairo agreement, which allowed the Palestinians a free hand in Lebanon. Also, the Taif agreement was drawn to ensure that the Lebanese army spreads his influence all over Lebanon, and stated that all militias should hand in their weapons to the Lebanese government.
Unfortunately, due to the Syrian hegemony none of the above occurred. The difficult question that asks itself after the Naher Al-Bared battle and the recent incident that took place in Ein-al-Hilweh between Fatah and Jund al-sham gang; are the Palestinian camps a ticking bomb ready to explode on the first spark and threaten the social mosaic of the Lebanese society as before? Should the camps be off limits to the Lebanese army and internal security agencies?
Dragging the Lebanese army and internal security forces in the Palestinian internal fights will weaken them. Before addressing the issue of the weapons, the government and the army should take into consideration the dilemma that the ordinary Palestinian was and still living, since Sabra and Shatila massacre in Sept 16, 1982. The Palestinians feel that they need their weapons to protect their families from any external and internal threat. So certain measures that ensure the safety of the refugees should be considered within any new agreement on the ground.
It is known that any sovereign country that respects itself should have the full authority on the ground. Nobody disputes the plight of the Palestinian people; however, the Lebanese army should be in charge of the safety of these refugees.
On the other hand, disarming the Palestinians forcefully from their weapons is a very sensitive issue that could lead to mini wars and blood shed that Lebanon could not afford at any stage. An agreement that ensures the co-operation of all the factions should be drawn.
The initial stage of this plan involves an intrepid decision from the Palestinian leaders from all factions to collect the arms from the residents and fighters; and store them in one place under their authority and supervision. The security within the camps should be the responsibility of joint forces from both the Lebanese and Palestinian. This team will report on the flow of arms, keep an eye on any terrorist cell that can sneak into the camps, and mostly keep order among all various factions. Involving the Palestinian citizens to be a watch dog, on any foreigner or terrorists that enter the camps, will help curb terrorism.
To prepare for the final stage, an Arab, European and International countries should establish a fund that can offer monetary compensation for all weapons that were handed in; so it can be passed later to the Lebanese army and the Lebanese Internal Security only.
This can be the first step in providing some means for the refugees to improve their standard of living. But most importantly, to ensure the co-operation of the Palestinian authority and refugees, the Lebanese government should re-evaluate the refugees' social and economic situation on the ground.
Socially and economically, the Lebanese political parties endorse UN resolution 194, article 11; that calls for the return of refuges and resist granting citizenship to the refugees. They refuse the call that the refugees who are scattered in the Arab world should be assimilated in these countries and lose the right of return. Settling of the Palestinians in Lebanon, this creates a big setback especially for the Lebanese social fabric (foundation), and can tip the balance of power and threatens the complex social mosaic of Lebanon. So, until a peace treaty is reached, and the status of the Palestinian refuges is resolved, the Palestinians have the right to live in dignity, and their social and economic conditions should be alleviated.
There are no two who disagree that the standard of living in these camps is intolerable, family of 13 to 15 persons live in one room with one or no bathroom at all. The infrastructure in the camps does not exist and the roads are narrow and unpaved, the air smells and poverty is prevailing. The increase in population in the limited areas of the camps had created congestion and more chaotic living conditions in them. The reasons for that; the camps were build temporary on the assumption that the refugees will return eventually to their homeland. Unemployment among the Palestinians (allowed working few jobs only) is high which leads to poverty. Poverty creates a generation of radicalism and extremism It also can attract radical groups who posses the money and the means to create better social conditions in these camps. Eventually, these camps become a hub for terrorists, as we have seen in Nahr Al Bared camp in the north. Ignoring the social status of the twelve camps that are scattered in Lebanon can be costly for Lebanon and the area.
The economic situation and civil rights in these camps should be addressed thoroughly between the Lebanese government and the Palestinian factions. One important topic is to improve the infrastructure of the camps so as to accommodate the increase in the populations. Laws should be introduced to allow the refugees to have a work permit that permits them to generate money. Introduce inheritance laws that will let the descendants of the Palestinians who are married to Lebanese women to inherit their mother's properties. In addition, the other refugees should have the right to improve their living status by allowing them to own properties in Lebanon as any other Arab or foreigners.
Jordan and Syria allows the Palestinians to work and own property there.
Recently Jordan is allowing them to improve the camps' conditions on the ground, and Syria permitted them to own property. These privileges did not lessen the patriotism of the Palestinians towards their cause or the fervor of right of return.
Lebanon faces obstacles that hinder its journey to freedom. The current military and social statuses of the camps are considered thorns in the side of Lebanese sovereignty, stability, and independence. Lebanon can not wait for a reasonable solution for the Palestinian refugees to materialize. To be able to ensure the security and stability of Lebanon, the above valiant procedures that guarantee the safety of the refugees and security of the camps should be implemented sooner than later. The issue of the Palestinian camps is one headache from many that needs full attentions from both Lebanese political rivals. March 8 and 14 should create the right atmosphere for dialogue or Lebanon existence and sovereignty is at stake.
Source: Ya Libnan Exclusive
Tags: Cairo, Democracy, Freedom, Israel, Lebanon, Palestinian Refugee Camps, Security
