War
The
following is a comprehensive account of the Lebanese war that
started 1975 and was to last decades. The account is based on
countless thousands of news articles and a variety of books. The
books include The Breakdown of the State in Lebanon by Farid el
Khazen, The PLO by Jillian Becker, Pity the Nation by Robert Fisk,
The Tragedy of Lebanon by Jonathan Randal, Arafat From Defender to
Dictator by Said Aburish, Sanctuary and Survival the PLO in Lebanon
by Rex Brynen, Beirut to Jerusalem by Thomas Friedman, The War of
Desperation by John Laffin, and Veil the Secret Wars of the CIA by
Bob Woodward, and the Library of Congress.
The
Lebanese war is very complex and has many dimensions so is not
considered, as some have claimed, to be a 'civil war' as many non
Lebanese nationals were very heavily involved, indeed armies of
neighbouring countries took part in much of the fighting. It is
unfortunate that there is reference to 'Christians' and 'Muslims' in
the following account as this may cause those unfamiliar with the
events to think that the war was one of religion. This would be
unfair and simplistic as religion was just used as a convenient
umbrella to stereotype and group the many factions and thus divide
them between two opposing sides. There were many 'Muslims' on the
'Christian side' and vice versa. The opposing sides were not
fighting each other simply because of their religion but as a result
of major differences of opinion on matters such as who should run
the country and how the country should be run. It was a war about
ideology, identity, nationality, insanity, and stupidity.
The
dimensions of the war comprised of a Lebanese-Palestinian war, a
Lebanese-Lebanese, a Palestinian-Syrian, a Palestinian-Israeli, a
Lebanese-Syrian, a Syrian-Israeli, and a Lebanese-Israeli war. Add
to these dimensions Libyans, Iraqis, Americans and Russians, and the
resulting chaotic soup of well over seventy groups fighting in
Lebanon would confuse the most ordered of minds.
The
War of 1958
After
the National Front coalition of Kamal Jumblatt and Saeb Salam
received major setbacks in the parliamentary elections of 1958 the
coalition and its Druze and Sunni supporters decided to take to the
streets and turned to violence through open rebellion against the
government. With the aid of some Arab powers, these left wing forces
which were inspired and encouraged by the February 1958 unification
of Egypt and Syria, agitated to make Lebanon a member of the new
United Arab Republic. The pro western government of Lebanon was
disliked by the Syrians who plotted to destabilize the country and
so encouraged and greatly assisted the rebels through mainly covert
operations. Syrian covert action became so obvious and widespread
that the Lebanese government lodged a complaint with the UN Security
Council in June 1958. ("Speech of Dr Malik before the UN Security
Council," 6 June 1958, S/823, 823rd Meeting, Security Council
Official Records, 1958, p. 4) Press reports and government documents
alike confirm a massive covert Syrian intervention that included
supplying arms to the opposition, training paramilitary forces and
using Syrian soldiers to carry out terrorist attacks.
Further
confirmation came from a seemingly unusual source, the Syrian
Socialist Nationalist Party (SSNP). The SSNP believed that the
leftist rebels wanted to liquidate them as part of a communist
inspired plot because the SSNP opposed the plans of President Nasser
of Egypt for union with Syria. In a press conference on May 19, 1958
Assad El Ashkar, the head of the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party
stated:
"As
for the actual intervention of the United Arab Republic, our
comrades at Idbil could clearly hear dialects of Syrians and
Egyptians when they fought with the attackers face to face. The
Syrian Army sent to Irsal (a Lebanese village on the borders near
Nabi Osman) several mortars. Major Hassan Hiddaa of the Syrian Army
entered the Lebanese town of Irsal in an armored car and stayed
there for a couple of hours, where he inspected the forces of
rebellion. The source of arms of all rebels in the Baalbec-Hirmel
district is the Sarraj Deuxieme Bureau. Abdo Hakim, another Syrian
officer at Homs is in charge of supplying the rebels with arms and
amunitions. He himself lead some of the caravans which carried arms
to Al-Kassr (another Lebanese village in the Hirmel District)."
In
a memorandum to Mr. Dag Hammarskjold, Secretary General of the
United Nations Organization the SSNP said:
"The
arming of the rebel tribes in the Hirmel district started on the
27th of March 1958, in the Syrian village of "al Hamam" on the
Syrian frontier bordering the Hirmel district in Northern
Bikaah.....The Syrian Lieutenant Abdu Hakeem was personally in
charge of arming the rebel tribes. He himself used to distribute
arms and lead convoys into the Lebanese territory......The attack on
Halba, Accar, was launched from Al-Kasser in Hirmil. Abdu Hakeem
harangued the rebels, then before the attack was started many Syrian
conscripts took part in the attack.....Another main centre of rebels
and infiltration is Orsal (a Lebanese frontier village). It is the
headquarters of the Syrian Major Hasssan Hiddah, In charge of the
Orsal-Baalbeck area. Recent information point out that ex-Colonel
Ali Hayyari, expelled from the Jordanian Army in 1957, is in charge
with Major Hiddah, of military rebel operations in Bikaah. On June
1st, 1958, Major Hiddah held in Orsal, a general meeting for all
Syrian conscripts participating in the rebellion. The meeting took
place near the house of the Mukhtar Hujjeiry......Syrian arms were
distributed to the village of Rassem Al Haddath, Shath, Younin,
Makheh, Brital, Hour Takla, Al Ein, Al Labweh, Dar el Wassia.On May
31st, Tawfic Halo Haidar, received from Major Hiddah, through the
Nabec - Orsal road, 300 machine guns and on June 8th, 1958, the
rebel tribesmen, Tahan Dandash, Salih Nasser-el Deen, Khudur
Saadoun, went to Damascus and came back with 900 guns. The number of
guns smuggled through the Bikaah borders up till that date, reached
approximately 3500 guns including machine guns, Bazooka guns and
other varieties. Big sums of money were also paid by the Syrian
authorities to rebel tribes."
The
memorandum continues:
"Deir
El Ashayir (a Lebanese village on the Syrian frontier) is the main
centre for arming and training of the rebels. Syrian officers are in
charge of their military training. Major Tawfic Janial of the Syrian
Deuxieme Bureau is in charge of arming the rebels of the Rashaya
district. Naassan Zakkar, officer in the Syrian Deuxieme Bureau is
in charge of the military operations. All the above-mentioned
officers work under the direct command of Captain Burhan Adham who
is in charge of the Syrian Deuxieme Bureau. Syrian army squadrons
are camping in Mankaa al Tufaah on the Syrian border where rebels
are being trained. Route of infiltration in this area starts at
Mankaa alTufah and continues through Deir el Ashayer, Khirbit Rouha
(now a meeting centre of infiltration and rebels), Ba'lool, Lala,
Ain Zebdi and then to the rebel Shouf district; Jumblat forces
mainly come from Houran (in the Syrian region)."
Although
the war took a toll of some 2,000 to 4,000 lives, it was regarded by
many as a comic opera, especially when 5,000 United States Marines
were landed on the beaches near Beirut and waded ashore among
sunbathers and swimmers. The Marines' role, in a situation described
by the Department of Defence as "like war but not war" was to
support the legal Lebanese government against any foreign invasion,
specifically against Syria. The Marines were summoned because
General Shihab, commander of the Lebanese Army, believing that units
of the small Lebanese army would mutiny and disintegrate if ordered
into action, had disobeyed President Chamoun's orders to send in the
army against leftist rebels.
Although
the crisis passed quickly, it was a sign of things that were soon to
come.
(On
the crisis in general, see F.I. Qubain, Crisis in Lebanon
(Washington, DC: Middle East Institute, 1961), pp. 71-168. For
specific Syrian covert operations, see for instance, "Verhaftung
eines Syrischen Terroristen," Neue Züricher Zeitung, 27 June 1958;
"Le Deuxième Bureau Syrien aurait équipé et énvoye des sommes à
Mouktara pour soutenir les insurgés de M. Joumblatt," L'Orient, 13
July 1958; PRO, FO 371/134133/VL1015/602, Scott to FO, 2 September
1958.)
The
1975 - 1990 War
The
Prelude to the 1975 War and the Cairo Agreement
Fouad
Shihab became president after Camille Chamoun and although he built
up the Lebanese intelligence service, called the Deuxième Bureau,
the army was almost ignored and remained powerless, small, and was
becoming weaker and weaker as time went on. The army's inactivity
continued under Shihab's successor, Charles Helou, who became
president in 1964. Helou and his army commander refused to commit
Lebanese troops to the June 1967 war as an armitice agreement had
been signed between the two countries in 1949 and the Lebanese Army
was far too small and weak to get involved. This enraged many
Lebanese Muslims as well as Syria, the mortal enemy of Israel.
Immediately after the Arab defeat of 1967 Syria started sending
Palestinian guerrillas into Lebanon to attack Israel. As soon as the
PLO came to Lebanon, the violence that was to destroy the country
began.
On
October 20, 1969 large numbers of Palestinain guerrillas began
gathering on the western slopes of Mount Hermon in the Arqub region
of Lebanon a few days later on the 29th these Palestinians fired on
a Lebanese army patrol which resulted in the deaths of three
Lebanese soldiers and the death one guerrilla with two injured.
Imediatley Voice of Palestine broadcasts from cairo started to warn
the Lebanese not to interfere with Palestinain raids into Israel.
Following the calsh a meering was held on 16 November to discuss the
matter. The meeting included the Lebanese Army commader Emile
Boustany, Cheif of Staff Yusif Shmayet, Intelligence Chief Gaby
Lahoud and representatives of Palestinian organisations. Palestinian
officials stated that their intention was to attack targets in
Israel and that to achieve this they needed to pass through Lebanese
territory. To that Boustany replied that Lebanon would not allow
such infiltrations. He then stated the Lebanese position on such
military activities and stressed the following:
(i)
Lebanon signed an armistice agreement with Israel in 1949; it was
still in effect and Lebanon could not violate it; (ii) Military
operations between Israel and the Arab countries are part of
military strategy under the United Arab Command. Lebanon cannot
allow turmoil on the Lebanese—Israeli border without co-ordination
with that military body, and (iii) Attacks carried out by the
Fedayin (guerrillas) from Lebanon would lead to violent Israeli
retaliations against civilians in Lebanese villages.
The
army and its Deuxième Bureau was not able to control the flow
Palestinian guerrillas infiltrating Lebanon from Syria, an attitude
that angered Christians who saw the Palestinian armed presence as a
mortal threat to Lebanon. In December 1968, the Lebanese government
was humiliated when Israeli commandos landed at Beirut International
Airport and destroyed thirteen Middle East Airlines and TMA aircraft
with impunity. The Israeli strike was in retaliation for a series of
Palestinian hijackings. The Lebanese army did not interfere with
Israeli attacks into Lebanon in retaliation against Palestinian
terror forces, the army and the Deuxiéme Bureau, and the government
were charged with collusion with Israel by the Lebanese left. Kamal
Jumblatt led the anti government chorus and demanded that Lebanon
supports the guerrillas.
A
few months later, on 15 April 1969, fighting broke out again between
the Lebanese Army and infiltrating guerrillas in the southern
village of Deir Mimas. Disturbances were also recorded in several
Palestinian camps. Four days later, another clash took place between
army troops and armed Palestinians in the villages of 'Odeiseh and
Khiyam, resulting in several casualties. Demonstrations also took
place in Beirut and in other major cities. On 22 April 1968 clashes
were renewed in the south in which several guerrillas were injured
and others detained. Clashes became recurrent as the number of
guerrillas operating in Lebanon increased. According to Lebanese
security sources, the number of guerrillas based in the south by
mid-1969 was approximately 4000. The majority belonged to Sa'iqa and
Fateh.
Confrontations
with government authorities were part of a Fateh strategy to
establish a permanent military presence in Lebanon. According to
George Hawi the head of the Communist Party, Arafat was uncertain
about the precarious state of affairs that prevailed in Jordan in
1969 as well as about the PLO's ability to take over Jordan, as
advocated by some Palestinian leaders. New alternatives had to be
explored. One such alternative was to strengthen Fateh's presence in
Lebanon and create 'new realities on the ground' especially since
the situation seemed favourable both inside the camps and in the
growing popular support for the PLO within the ranks of the Lebanese
left wing parties.
The
more serious clash, however, took place not in remote areas near the
Lebanese—Israeli border but in Sidon and Beirut. No sooner had the
country recovered from the Israeli raid than it found itself
engulfed, in April 1969, in a crisis over the Palestinian problem in
its Arab and Lebanese dimensions as opposed to the more predictable
Israeli dimension. The occasion for turmoil was a demonstration
called for by several Lebanese Leftist and Arab nationalist parties
led by Kamal Jumblatt to protest against 'the reactionary policies
of the Lebanese government towards Fedayin action' and to call for
'the opening of southern borders for guerrilla operations against
Israel'. On the surface, the demonstration looked like yet another
episode of arm twisting between government authorities and
pro-Palestinian groups. In reality, however, what happened was a
Fateh-instigated confrontation with the Lebanese government. Such a
confrontation would provoke a crisis which, in turn, would bring the
issue of PLO armed presence into the open.
On
the 23rd April in Sidon, armed demonstrators coming from Ayn
al-Helweh camp stormed the municipality building in the city and
clashed with security forces. In Beirut, the clash started in the
Barbir area as demonstrators tried to force their way through
internal security forces deployed on the scene. According to a
Leftist activist who took part in the demonstration, shooting
started when a man in his early twenties in sportswear walked
towards the front row of the demonstration, about fifteen minutes
after it started, and opened fire at the security forces. He then
ran away as the security forces started shooting. In the process,
two people were killed and many others were injured. While the
identity of the agent provocateur was not known, it was clear that
the intention was to provoke turmoil. Clearly, the demonstration and
the bloody confrontations that followed in Beirut, Sidon, Tripoli
and the Beqa were not an accidental show of force. Clashes resulted
in 11 people dead, including five Lebanese security forces and more
than 80 injured.
What
made the demonstration qualitatively different was its political
significance. It signalled, in the words of Mohsin Ibrahim head of
the Organisation of Communist Action, 'the decision to open the
battle' with the Lebanese government. Equally important was that it
was viewed by the Left in Lebanon as a revolutionary event of
unprecedented importance. For Lebanese Communist Party ideologue
Mahdi 'Amil, the 'April 23 uprising' ('Intifada') was a political
and ideological achievement of 'historic significance', with it,
'Lebanon's class struggle began' and a new political force was born
'to break the hold of the bourgeoisie-controlled' political system
and 'to protect the Palestinian Resistance.
Reacting
to these events, the government imposed a four day nation-wide
curfew. Several demonstrators were detained, including pro-Iraq
Ba'th Party leader Abdul-Majid al-Rafi'. On 24 April, the Sunni
prime minister, Rashid Karame resigned in a show of support for the
Palestinians and the search for ways to end the crisis began. It was
to continue for the next seven months until a formula of
'coexistence' between the Lebanese state and the Palestinian
revolution was found. The Lebanon was paralized as the President
found it impossible to form a new government as the Sunni leadership
refused to do so unless Lebanon started a policy of coordination
with the PLO. That formula was the Cairo Agreement. The situation
forced army commander General Emile Bustani to sign the an agreement
in Cairo in November 1969 with Palestinian representatives. The
Cairo Agreement granted to the Palestinians the right to keep
weapons in their camps and to attack Israel across Lebanon's border
and for their part the Plaestinians had to respect Lebanese laws and
Lebanon's sovereignty. By sanctioning the armed Palestinian
presence, however, Lebanon surrendered full sovereignty over
military operations conducted within and across its borders and
became a party to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Given
the prevailing internal and regional considerations, the Cairo
Agreement provided relief for all parties who regarded it as a
face-saving arrangement and an expedient truce short of better
alternatives. For most Christian leaders, the Cairo Agreement was
the 'lesser of two evils'. For Camille Chamoun, what counted were
Palestinian intentions and their willingness to abide by the
agreement when put to the test. Another Christian response was that
of Pierre Gemayel who saw the Cairo Agreement as 'a middle ground
solution' between two divergent views on the PLO in Lebanon. While
acknowledging that military operations would eventually lead to
Israeli raids, Gemayel explained that it 'would still be easier to
cope with such raids than with a civil war between the Lebanese'.
Raymond
Eddé was the only Lebanese leader who had consistently opposed the
notion of supporting the Palestinians and, subsequently, the Cairo
Agreement. He never missed the opportunity to reiterate his position
and to argue that such an arrangement hurt the interests of both
Lebanon and the PLO. But Eddé's views, and his call for the
deployment of United Nations troops along the Lebanese—Israeli
borders, went unheeded. Another strong reaction to the Cairo
Agreement came from Maronite Patriarch Méouchy, who submitted a
memorandum to the president in which he voiced concern over the
military provisions of the agreement.
Those
who stood to benefit most from the outcome of the events that marked
the stormy year of 1969 were Kamal Jumblatt, Leftist parties and, in
a different way, the Sunni political establishment. Indeed, the
Cairo Agreement met the demands voiced by the Sunni political and
religious leadership. On the eve of the Cairo talks, Sunni Mufti
Hassan Khalid convened two meetings attended by Lebanon's leading
political and religious figures and issued a statement calling for
the freedom of guerrilla action. An attempt tp convene a meeting by
Shiite cleric Musa al-Sadr in support of the guerrillas was not
successful as the meeting was boycotted by leading Shiite figures.
For
his role in forcing through the Cairo Agreement Jumblatt was
rewarded with the post of interior minister by Rashid Karame.
Jumblatt proceeded by replacing the army presence in the camps with
internal security forces who were under his command and was
therefore able to assist them in their arms build-up.
Nearly
three weeks after the signing of the agreement clashes between the
guerrillas and the Lebanese Army were renewed this time in the
Nabatiyeh camp in the south. The Cairo Agreement was violated from
the start and it became irrelevant.
The
Troubled Years, 1970-1974
Despite
Arab support for the PLO and the international attention it was able
to generate, the PLO would not have been able to operate as an
autonomous movement in the absence of the sanctuary it found in
Lebanon. The autonomy it enjoyed in Lebanon could not be found in
any other Arab country. In the years following the loss of its
Jordan base, the PLO came to view its Lebanon base in strategic
terms. As a result, Lebanon was no longer a place where the PLO
would be content with limited political and military presence. In
the early 1970s, Palestinian organisations displayed little
willingness to abide by agreements, which in reality were no more
than hasty deals mirroring the balance of power of the late 1960s.
Beginning
in 1970, Palestinian-Israeli raids in the south intensified, as did
the clashes between the Lebanese Army and the guerrillas. One of the
early clashes after the Cairo Agreement occurred in March 1970 in
the south, resulting in several casualties. Violence began to drive
local inhabitants to seek shelter outside their villages,
particularly in the suburbs of Beirut.
Demonstrations
were held in Beirut to protest the policies of the Lebanese
government towards Arab causes' and the Palestinian revolution. The
confusing setting of Arab politics was clearly apparent in the
slogans the demonstrators raised, comparing President Helou to Nun
al-Said, Iraq's strong man under the Hashernite monarchy, and
calling for his overthrow.
A
serious confrontation involving PLO guerrillas occurred in March
1970. Clashes began in the Maronite town of Kahhaleh and spread
immediately to the outskirts of Beirut. While disturbances lasted
only three days, they had unprecedented confessional overtones.
The
incident began on 25 March, following an exchange of gunfire between
Palestinians escorting a convoy of cars passing through the
Christian town of Kahhaleh (located on the major Beirut-Damascus
road) on their way to Damascus to bury a Palestinian commando
officer. On their way back, the Palestinian convoy, which was larger
and more heavily armed than the previous one, came under heavy fire
as it passed through the main road in the town. Gunfire went on for
forty-five minutes and resulted in several casualties.
Immediately
after the incident, attempts at reconciliation began. Jumblatt, in
his capacity as minister of the interior, conferred with delegations
representing the Palestinians and representatives of the inhabitants
of Kahhaleh. Despite these efforts, fighting spread to other areas
around Palestinian camps in the areas of Dikwaneh and Harit Hreik.
In these two localities, largely populated by Christians of lower
and middle class backgrounds the guerrillas had already begun to
expand their military presence outside the camps where they would
set up roadblocks and harass passers-by. In Dikwaneh, where the
Tal-Zatar camp was located, Palestinian guerrillas raided a local
office of the Kataeb Party. But more importantly they kidnapped
Pierre Gemayel's younger son, Bashir, who, at the time, was not yet
directly involved in party politics. Although Gemayel, along with
his two companions, were released the same day from a Fateh office
on Hamra street, the symbolic significance of the episode was clear.
From that day Bashir Gemayel would get involved in politics.
In
the summer of 1970 Sulayman Franjieh (also Frangieh) was elected
president. Believing that the Deuxième Bureau was staffed with
Shihab loyalists, Franjieh purged it and stripped it of its powers.
But the Deuxième Bureau had been the only governmental entity
capable of monitoring and controlling the Palestinians, and
Franjieh's action unintentionally gave the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO), commanded by Yasser Arafat, more freedom of
action in Lebanon. Franjieh, who came from Zgharta in northern
Lebanon, was accused of promoting his own power and catering to the
interests of his clansmen instead of confronting Lebanon's growing
security problems. Meanwhile, the PLO made a bid to topple Jordan's
King Hussein, but it was crushed and evicted from the country after
fierce fighting, an event known in the Palestinian lexicon as "Black September." Therefore, the PLO
leadership and guerrillas moved their main base of operations from
Jordan to Lebanon, where the Cairo Agreement endorsed their
presence. The influx of several hundred thousand Palestinians
including many tens of thousands of guerrillas upset Lebanon's
delicate confessional balance, and polarized the nation into two
groups, those who supported and those who opposed the PLO presence.
Public
order deteriorated with daily acts of violence between Christians
and Palestinians. To counter Christian political resistance the PLO
set about isolating the Christian community and distorting Christian
image and goals. The Christians were branded as isolationists,
traitors, rightists, fascists, anti Arab, and Israeli collaborators.
The PLO media machine which controlled most of the press activity of
Beirut did such a fine job distorting the truth about their Lebanese
opponents that to this day the Lebanese Christians are having
difficulty in shaking off the isolationist label given to them by
the PLO.
Meanwhile,
the Israeli Air Force launched raids against the Palestinian refugee
camps in retaliation for PLO terrorist attacks in Western Europe. On
April 10, 1973, Israeli commandos infiltrated Beirut in a daring
raid and attacked Palestinian command centres in the heart of the
capital, killing three prominent PLO leaders: Kamal Nasir, poet and
the PLO's official spokesman; Muhammad al-Najjar, head of the Higher
Political Committee for Palestinian Affairs in Lebanon, member of
the PLO Executive Committee and Fateh Central Committee; and Kamal
Udwan, also a member of the Fateh Central Committee. The absence of
the Lebanese Army during the Israeli attack angered Lebanese
Muslims. Prime Minister Saib Salam claimed that Army commander
General Alexander Ghanim--a Maronite--had disobeyed orders by not
resisting the Israeli raid, and he threatened to resign unless
Ghanim were stripped of his rank. Because Ghanim was allowed to
remain as army commander (until he was replaced by Hanna Said in
September 1975), Salam did resign and was succeeded by a series of
weak prime ministers.
Friction
between the guerrillas and the security forces increased rapidly
thereafter. On April 14 1973 the US-owned oil terminus at Zahrani
was bombed, allegedly by the PFLP-GC; on April 27 three men were
arrested with explosives at Beirut airport, where a bomb was found
the next day; on April 30 several armed DFLP members were arrested
as they drove past the US Embassy. In response, two Lebanese
soldiers were kidnapped on May 1st which finally forced the Lebanese
Army into action against the PLO. The refugee camps were then
surrounded and attacked by the army. In response to Palestinian
shelling of the airport, the Lebanese Air Force was ordered into
action against the Burj al-Barajina camp in Beirut. A state of
emergency was declared throughout the country.
As
the fighting intensified, the PLO appealed to external allies for
support. Algeria, Libya, and Syria promptly condemned the Lebanese
government's actions. All three, together with Kuwait, Egypt,
Morocco, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and the Arab League offered
to mediate. Egypt and Syria-now planning what would become the
October 1973 Arab-Israeli War-were particularly anxious to contain
the conflict, and exerted considerable pressure to that end. This
included the closure of the Syrian-Lebanese border on May 8, and the
movement of Fateh and Sa'iqa forces from Syria to a few kilometers
inside Lebanon. Fearing a Syrian invasion, the Lebanese looked for a
way to end the fighting.
On
May 17, after some seventeen hours of negotiation, the two sides
announced that they had reached agreement, the "Melkart Protocol".
This Melkart Agreement, on the one hand obligated the PLO to respect
the "independence, stability, and sovereignty" of Lebanon but on the
other hard gave the PLO virtual autonomy, including the right to
maintain its own militia forces in certain areas of Lebanon. These
provisions of the Melkart Agreement differed greatly from the Cairo
Agreement, which preserved the "exercise of full powers in all
regions and in all circumstances by Lebanese civilian and military
authorities."
Lebanese
Muslims believed that under the Melkart Agreement Palestinian
refugees in Lebanon had been accorded a greater degree of
self-determination than some Lebanese citizens. Inspired by this,
they organized themselves politically and militarily and encouraged
by the Palestinians tried to wrest similar concessions from the
central government. In 1974 Druze leader Kamal Jumblatt established
the Lebanese National Movement (formerly the Front for Progressive
Parties and National Forces), an umbrella group comprising
antigovernment forces.
A
military build-up was underway. Following the 1969 events, Kataeb
Party members were involved in occasional military training. The
turning point, however, occurred after the 1973 confrontations
between the Lebanese army and PLO forces, when Christian-based
parties began to acquire heavy weapons and were engaged in organised
training. The most organised and disciplined Christian-based party
was the Kataeb. With its para-military structure and large following
in various parts of the country, the Kataeb Party was, as Frank
Stoakes indicated, 'a valuable auxiliary of the state' and always
ready to come to its defence in times of crisis.' Other parties
began to organise militarily, notably Chamoun's National Liberal
Party and a small elitist group of young professionals called
al-Tanzim, headed by physician Fouad Chemali.
Lebanese
parties, of all persuasions, Christian and Muslim, Left and Right,
lagged behind the PLO. Not only did they lack a similar military and
security infrastructure, they had limited financial resources.
Leftist and Muslim-based parties operated closely with the PLO and
received heavy financial and military support from Arab countries,
notably Libya, Syria and Iraq. Christian-based parties, for their
part, relied mainly on private financial support. They also received
military assistance, beginning in 1973, from the Lebanese army,
which consisted of training and light weapons.
On
the eve of the war in 1975 the military balance in the country was
largely in favour of the PLO. Of the eight PLO organisations, with a
total strength of 22,900 troops, Fateh had the largest number of
fighters (7,000) and was the best equipped, followed by Saiqa
(4,500). The fighting force of other major organisations was of
almost equal size, numbering about 2500 each. The distribution of
armed men in seven major camps in October 1975 was as follows:
al-Rashidiyeh (7,300), Ayn al-Helweh (4,500), Tal-Za'tar (3,225),
Shatila (2,500), Nahr al-Band (1,700), al-Burj al-Shimali (1,625)
and Borj al-Barajneh (1,300). Therefore, the largest concentration
was in the south and the Beirut area.
The
Lebanese army was 19,000 strong. Only about half that number was a
fighting force. The largest number of militiamen was that of the
Kataeb Party (8,000), followed by the Lebanese Communist Party and
the Progressive Socialist Party (5,000 each) and by the Syrian
Social Nationalist Party and the National Liberal Party (4,000
each). Leftist, nationalist and Muslim-based parties, which were
part of the LNM, had a total number of 18,700 militiamen and with
the PLO the anti government forces numbered some 41,600 while
Christian-based parties had 12,000. The break up of the army made
the ratio worse for the Christian based parties as the result was
46,600 left wing troops against 15,000 right wing troops.
The
Opening Rounds, 1975
By
the mid 1970s PLO conduct in Lebanon had reached incredible lows.
Arafat's realm within Lebanon became known as the Fakhani Republic
named after the district of Beirut where he had set up his
headquarters, in large areas of Lebanon his authority was supreme.
In a flagrant violation of Lebanese sovereignty the PLO set up road
blocks, issued passes and travel documents, took over entire
buildings, operated extortion rackets, protected criminals fleeing
Lebanese justice, stole cars, expelled residents, and opened
unlicensed shops, bars, and nightclubs. They even raped and murdered
at will. Despite repeated pleas from his old guard and from Lebanese
Christian leaders, Arafat did nothing to control the behaviour of
his Palestinians.
In
a memorandum submitted to the Lebanese Chamber of Deputies on 7th
November 1975 by the Standing Conference of the Superior-Generals of
the Monastic Orders of Lebanon, they state:
'The
Palestinian resistance interfere in Lebanese politics, in alliance
with such groups as it believes can be of advantage to it, and
openly try to bring them to power by calling upon them to cause
disturbances even such as involve the use of arms, using external
pressure on the Lebanese state through certain Arab countries when
it seems to be in its interest to extract from the Lebanese
authorities such privileges as have not been extracted before. The
resistance also believes itself entitled to call openly upon the
Lebanese to deny their political system, impeding the normal course
of the constitutional and administrative institutions (the army, for
example) by openly appealing to one or other of the Arab countries,
which then pours in its money to direct the information media (and
the press in particular) as it wishes, and, indeed, to mold them and
to undermine their national role so as to suppress the expression of
any opinion favorable to Lebanon in its own interest, providing a
base and a refuge for international
terrorism which can only be injurious to Lebanon."
A
year later, on 14th October 1976 Edward Ghorra, the Lebanese
AmbAssador to the United Nations described the actions of the
Palestinians to the UN General Assembly:
"The
Palestinians had transformed most, if not all, of the refugee camps
into military bastions around our major cities. Moreover, common-law
criminals fleeing from Lebanese justice find shelter and protection
in the camps. Palestinian elements belonging to various splinter
organizations resorted to kidnapping Lebanese and sometimes
foreigners, holding them prisoner, questioning them, and even
killing them. They committed all sorts of crimes in Lebanon and also
escaped Lebanese justice in the protection of the camps. They
smuggled goods into Lebanon and openly sold them on our streets.
They went so far as to demand protection money from many individuals
and owners of buildings and factories situated in the vicinity of
the camps."
Even
strong supporters of the PLO had been moved to comment on the
behavior of the Palestinians. In his book, I Speak for Lebanon,
written in 1977 shortly before his death, Kamal Jumblat the main
ally of the Palestinians in Lebanon wrote:
"It
has to be said that the Palestinians themselves, by violating
Lebanese law, bearing arms as they chose and policing certain
important points of access to the capital, actually furthered the
plot that had been hatched against them. They carelessly exposed
themselves to criticism and even to hatred. High officials and
administrators were occasionally stopped and asked for their
identity papers by Palestinian patrols. From time to time, Lebanese
citizens and foreigners were arrested and imprisoned, on the true or
false pretext of having posed a threat to the Palestinian
revolution. Such actions were, at first, forgiven, but became
increasingly difficult to tolerate. Outsiders making the law in
Lebanon, armed demonstrations and ceremonies, military funerals for
martyrs of the revolution, it all mounted up and began to alienate
public opinion, especially conservative opinion, which was
particularly concerned about security.... I never saw a less
discreet, less cautious revolution."
It
is interesting to note that throughout the war, and despite the
close alliance between the Druze PSP and the Palestinians, the PSP
would not permit the stationing of significant numbers of
Palestinian troops in Druze-held areas of the Shuf Mountains.
Trouble
began to brew very early in 1975 when a Lebanese Army barracks in
Tyre was hit by 8 rockets fired from a nearby Palestinian camp on
January 20th. Matters came to a head in February 1975 when the
Lebanese Communist Party and other leftists organized violent
demonstrations in Sidon on behalf of fishermen who were threatened
economically by a state monopoly fishing company. The Lebanese Army
was called in to restore order, but, in the volatile atmosphere,
armed clashes erupted. Muslim politicians protested that the use of
the army was a violation of the demonstrators' democratic liberties
and asked why the army was shooting at civilians rather than
defending Lebanon's borders against Israeli incursions. Sunni
leaders also faulted the channels used for ordering the army into
action. General Ghanim had assumed charge of the army's conduct and
reported directly to President Franjieh, ignoring Sunni Muslim Prime
Minister Rashid as Sulh (also seen as Solh). Meanwhile, thousands of
students in mainly Christian East Beirut demonstrated in support of
the army. These serious splits were exacerbated when Maruf Saad, a
pro-Palestinian Sunni populist leader, died in March of wounds
suffered during the Sidon clashes. Long-standing concerns that the
army would disintegrate if it were called into action were
vindicated when intense fighting broke out between Maronite and
Muslim army recruits.
The
various nationalistic, pro government, mainly Christian parties as
they watched the authority of the Lebanese government collapse,
organized themselves into militias in an attempt to counter the
threat from the Palestinian presence. These various militias such as
the Phalange, the Ahrar Tigers, and the Guardians of the Cedars,
realizing that they were out numbered and out gunned combined
politically under one central command, The Lebanese Front.