❊ Crappy “Centrism” on the Tribunal

Mr. Walid Jumblat has just made a press conference on the Tribunal that sounded very much like PM Najib Mikati’s statement on the matter. From these speeches one can detect a pattern, a new sort of “Mikati centrism” emerging on how to deal with this important international matter.

How to be a Mikati centrist on the Tribunal

Here is a guide for all politicians who wish to speak the language of Mikati centrism:

1. Use as many weasel words as you can. The aim is for different words to sound different to different audiences. Words like “responsibly” and “realistically” are especially desirable
2. Make it sound as if hell on earth will open in Lebanon if the government deals directly and seriously with the tribunal. Use words like fitna (deep division) tashannoj (tension) and ihtikan (bottled up emotions)
3. Try as much as possible to evoke martyr Hariri’s quote “Nobody is larger than his country”. The idea you are trying to convey is that even Mr. Hariri himself would have given up justice for stability. Bonus for using the opposition’s godfather against them
4. Focus as much as possible on the fact that the indictment targets individuals, not parties or sects. Maybe if you repeat this often enough, Hezbollah will ignore the fact that you’re dealing with the tribunal, and the people will forget that individuals need political orders from the top to carry out missions as huge as assassinating a Prime Minister
5. Remind everyone of the dangerous time the region is living in, and of the importance of stability in Lebanon
6. Try to remove all the politics from the tribunal. Make it all a technical and legal issue. Maybe by doing this people will talk about it less and it will be relegated to simple technical discussions among lawyers

Why this won’t work

Mikati centrism is just a new iteration of the “no winners, no losers” Lebanese dictum. The false belief that you can somehow make everyone happy even in zero sum situations. In this case, the logic is taken to an extreme of trying to appease both the prosecutor and the accused. This won’t work because it’s a case of kicking a can down the road. In the end, something will have to give.

The big elephant in the room

The question to ask is this: If Hezbollah didn’t have all these weapons. If Hezbollah is not all that powerful, would have everyone been so “centrist” about this? Isn’t the weasel word “fitna” just a way of saying that Hezbollah will start shooting people if they get upset? Those centrists should ask themselves: Are they really being wise and responsible as they believe they are? Or are they simply cowards who want to appease the big guys with the guns?