The ongoing crisis in Syria has provoked strong reactions in neighbouring Lebanon, with different groups lining up behind or in opposition to the Al-Assad regime, writes Scheherezade Faramarzi in Beirut A traveller to Lebanon innocently saluted a young soldier who had suddenly appeared in front of her by saying marhaba. "He's Syrian," her Lebanese companion said, as though an unforgivable sin of betrayal had been committed. "Oh, I thought he was a Lebanese soldier," said the foreigner, not having paid attention to the uniform and the soldier's scruffy appearance. The incident, back in 1994, was nothing out of the ordinary and was merely a reflection of the widespread anti-Syrian sentiments of ordinary Lebanese toward the Syrians. The Syrian army, which occupied Lebanon for almost 30 years, albeit invited in 1976 at the request of the Lebanese Christian Maronites just a year after the start of the 15-year civil war, was very unpopular and was often reviled by large sections of the population because of its corruption, not only for running the country as its own, but also for its ruthless actions against opponents. Kidnappings, murder, torture and theft of property were all considered fair game. So it's no surprise that Syria's current crisis has provoked strong reactions in Lebanon, a country marked by sectarian rivalries and shifting alliances. The crisis has pitted pro-Syrian parties and politicians, including Hizbullah, as well as ordinary people, against rival pro-western factions generally referred to as the 14 March Movement. Opponents of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad are even warning that the war in neighbouring Syria could spill over into Lebanon and that Al-Assad could stir up trouble there, such as resuming assassinations of public figures. A 14 March politician has gone as far as to claim that when al-Assad is faced with the ultimate threat of ouster, he will bring down Lebanon with him. Many Christians fear the possible ascendancy of Sunni fundamentalists like the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis supported by Saudi Arabia if Al-Assad falls. Patriarch Bechara Al-Rai, head of the Maronite Church, long critical of Damascus, has warned that the Christian presence in the Middle East could be threatened and that Al-Assad should be given a chance to reform. Most of Syria's Christian minority supports the secular Baath regime in Syria and fears for its fate if the Syrian revolution wins. The Lebanese government is trying to avoid taking sides in the conflict, though it voted against suspending Syria from the Arab League last November and has refused to impose sanctions against Syria, saying it could hurt Lebanon. The country is also hosting thousands of Syrian refugees fleeing bloodshed back home. With tempers rising, the sharp split over Damascus has come to a head on the streets of Beirut and on TV talk shows. On one show, a Lebanese supporter of al-Assad slapped his anti-Syrian co-panelist on the face in front of live cameras, and on another show the head of Lebanon's Baath Party threw a glass of water at a Lebanese politician who had called Al-Assad a liar. More seriously, two people were killed and 12 wounded in clashes last month in the northern Lebanese town of Tripoli between Sunni sympathisers of the Syrian opposition and Alawites who support the Syrian regime. Alawites are a Shia offshoot that makes up the majority of the Syrian regime's leadership. Beirut has also witnessed rallies organised by supporters and opponents of the regime in Damascus. Early this month, a protest staged by Salafis attracted more than a thousand demonstrators. A smaller pro-Al-Assad rally organised by the Lebanese branch of the Baath Party gathered nearby, with many demonstrators carrying Syrian flags with Al-Assad's face superimposed on them. They chanted against the emir of Qatar and trampled on a poster on which he appeared alongside King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. The two Gulf states have reportedly given financial and military assistance to the Syrian opposition. Speaking to the demonstrators, interior minister Marwan Chabel expressed the mood in the country. "Fear exists because the security situation around [Lebanon] is not stable." The leadership of Lebanon's main parties, including Future, Hizbullah and Amal, did not take part in the demonstrations. The Syrian crisis has not only further exacerbated divisions between the two main factions, but has also created a schism among supporters of the Syrian regime, made up of Hizbullah, the nationalists, liberals and leftists. The secularists' support has been mainly because of Syria's role in the Arab-Israeli struggle, as it has presented itself as the only state now confronting Israel. "Many of us here in Lebanon, who have always counted ourselves as strong supporters of Hizbullah, have become concerned about the fate of the resistance if the Syrian regime were to fall," Bilal Al-Amin recently wrote in the leftist Al-Akhbar daily that is close to Hizbullah. "For two decades now, Syria has been a key link in the chain connecting Iran to the resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine. This alliance has been largely successful in confronting Israel, even defeating it militarily twice in Lebanon, and fending off US meddling in the region, like in Iraq," he wrote. The aim of the United States and Europe, he said, was to weaken this alliance by trying to isolate Iran by using its alleged nuclear weapons programme as an excuse and by having Israel attack Hizbullah and Hamas, as it did in 2006 and 2008. Having failed in these attempts, wrote al-Amine, "Washington, and Paris in particular, came to the conclusion that Syria may be the weak link in the chain." Bassam Haddad, writing in the Jadaliyya website, said that Syria's leading role in the resistance against Israel should not be an excuse for unconditional support for Al-Assad. "Conversely, supporting the demise of the Syrian regime by any and all means, including external military intervention, is extremely reckless, especially if the objective is to save Syrian lives or to set the stage for a post-regime path of self-determination," he said. The split is not so much within the Lebanese resistance camp, but rather within the camp of the left or the progressives -- between those who are "anti-imperialist" and against US hegemony and Israel, and those who are more liberal and concerned about individual freedom and liberties, Al-Amin said. Having supported the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings, the Lebanese left had found itself "on different sides of the barricades" when the Syrian rebellion erupted, he added. While one side supports the revolt, the other, made up of "longtime Damascus supporters", saw the Syrian rebellion as "part of an ongoing campaign by western powers to bring down the Al-Assad regime," Al-Amin said. A third and smaller group, including Al-Amin himself, feels that the regime needs a complete overhaul, despite misgivings about the uprising. "The confrontation between the first two camps has become so polarised that it has been extremely difficult to articulate an independent position without being accused of hypocrisy or of standing with a dictator against the people," he wrote. The dilemma the pro-resistance Lebanese are facing is whether they can continue to support Al-Assad, given his brutal suppression of the uprising. To speak against it would give credibility to the foreign-backed opposition, which may undo the efforts the resistance front has made over more than two decades to counter Israeli and US influence in the region. Damascus's bloody crackdown on the protests, said al-Amine, had made it next to impossible to say anything negative about the opposition. Criticising it would be tantamount to justifying the regime's repression. However, staunch leftist supporters of the resistance were determined to support Hizbullah and Syria at any cost, Al-Amin told Al-Ahram Weekly in an interview. "They are willing to close their eyes when it comes to massacres, arguing that the imperialist danger is at the door. They try to inflate the mistakes of the Syrian opposition and forget that the regime has already committed the same sins of imperialism," he said. Journalist Khaled Saghieh agreed. "The Salafist danger is being exaggerated here in order to frighten the Christians and the Shia from the alternative to the Al-Assad regime," he said in an interview. Hizbullah, he said, would be negatively affected if the Syrian regime falls, "but I think it can adapt." He said Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah's failure to take the risk of criticising Al-Assad's brutality in suppressing the uprising had cost him his credibility among the Syrian people who had been supportive of the resistance. But, Saghieh said, in an opinion piece written last year, it would be naive to expect Hizbullah to support the toppling of the regime. "Those who have been so eager to bestow a romantic aura on Hizbullah as a disciplined liberation movement should try to restrain their ardour. That said, it seems that Hizbullah has become the hostage of an image that has been imposed on it." In the interview, Al-Amin said Hizbullah had prepared itself for the worst-case scenario and that it had already taken steps to be less dependent on Syria in terms of weapons and support. Haddad said that the situation should not be governed by emotional appeals. "One can be moved by the urgency of saving Syrian lives today, but if this is the ultimate purpose, and if Syrians' self-determination is the desired outcome, one can easily see the perils of military intervention, which will make the current killing look like a picnic." Asaad Abu Khalil of the Angry Arab blog urged progressives to "stand opposed to the regime and to the Israeli/US/Saudi plot. That is their obligation for the sake of the Syrian people, and not for the sake of those who speak on their behalf for purposes that are related neither to democracy nor to freedom." The divisions among the Lebanese were academic ones because the Lebanese government had made an "effective job of insulating the country from the situation across the border," according to Elias Muhanna of the Qifa Nabki blog. If a government led by the 14 March Movement were in power in Lebanon, "we may have seen these divisions take on practical and political significance by now, because Lebanon would have been caught up more decisively in the conflict." "On the other hand, maybe we wouldn't be seeing these divisions among the Lebanese left if 14 March was in power, because it would give greater weight to Hizbullah's argument that the uprising against Al-Assad is a foreign conspiracy." "It may be that [Lebanese Prime Minister Najib] Miqati's hands-off approach is actually maintaining an atmosphere of relative stability, within which Lebanese erstwhile supporters of Al-Assad can bicker amongst themselves," Muhanna said.
