The substitute before change | Joseph Wanis | Lebanese Elections 2013

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by rickybadaan, Oct 17, 2012.

  1. rickybadaan

    rickybadaan Rookie

    Oct 17, 2012
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Previous experiences have proved that the expected target of reform hasn’t been realized despite the change that took place since the withdrawal of the Syrian forces from Lebanon on April 26, 2005.
    The Lebanese people had been desirous for a substantial change in the parliamentary election procedures and for selecting a new set of parliamentarians who can perfectly represent them and provide them with moral, before material needs. Accordingly, the people voted in some districts for “reform and change”. Their goals for the change were achieved but, unfortunately, reform was put on the shelf. Since 2005, the electoral change has been taking place in the governate of Mount Lebanon and a few other locations. Hence the people elected their “real” representatives, wishing them all luck in their tasks, and supporting them in their workshop for intended reform at all political, social, and economic levels. However, this change was not translated into reform within the Lebanese state structure. Many excuses and justifications were forwarded just to free the government from its obligations and responsibilities towards supporting reform laws, or even its participation in the process. The Lebanese people kept waiting and hoping that the state, which had been built on corruption and lawlessness for decades, would correct itself, realizing at the same time that that would not happen within few days or months to come.
    The 2009 elections were held and the people voted again in some governates (muhafazat)for reform and change – their wishes being fulfilled, their optimism enhanced and, most importantly, their democratic rights maintained; thus expressing their motto “yes, for Reform and Change in Lebanon”. So, as soon as the election results were announced, fire-works expressing joy and elation filled the skies – giving new hopes for a new political regime. Such a regime was expected to fight corruption and fulfill peoples’ eagerness for establishing a new “nation” built on goodness, honesty, love, giving and accountability - a nation ridding itself from favoritism, nepotism, and lawlessness in all governmental institutions and directorates.
    So, a few years after the first election following the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, questions arose as to what has been achieved concerning reform, and whether the Lebanese people have benefited from the change alone. Definitely, no reform was applied but, conversely the status quo and chaos remained unchanged. The reasons go back to a basic and substantial factor that some parliamentarians, basically elected to push for reform, remained powerless – probably being uncommitted enough to the idea of reform, or being unable to struggle for reaching their goals.
    Eventually, the general view in the country continued, and all hopes for reform evaporated, despite the slight change that had taken place already. As a result, a wave of vengeance arose against the government elite, as well as a spree of despair of the possibility for “Reform and Change”.
    Now, let’s learn about reformists themselves. A reformist understands reform as a life journey and a daily practice founded on fixed, un-bargained principles. He doesn’t accommodate reform to serve his own personal interests. He honors and shows high regard to the spirits of martyrs and doesn’t deny his friends with whom he fought and struggled for a better future. So a person who really wants reform can do it only if he is faithful to his cause, through real hard work, trying to overcome all hindrances for achieving and applying it.
    Contrarily, if he uses the “cause” just to seek posts and titles, to obtain “blue license plates” , and breathtakingly runs for material gains (to dissipate on friends and sycophants), he is certainly an incompetent reformist. Correspondingly, we are reformists and will continue to be. We do believe in Reform and Change, verbally and actively. Here we would like to reiterate the words of the famous write RiyadHnein, “It is true that accumulating drops of water doesn’t build a pyramid, yet it truly forms a lake.” So, reform in Lebanon needs not those who always create silly excuses to justify their incompetence, but it needs qualified persons for dealing with the present economic and political failure, by proposing plans, means, and programs leading to the execution of the required missions.
    As a result, as long as Lebanon is doomed by corruption and favoritism, those who were elected to apply the reform they had in mind, remained fully unable to push it forward; therefor they must insist that “the substitute before change” is the most essential commitment for the 2013 parliamentary elections.
    I would like to mention that bad intentions towards reform and ignorance of its true concept lead to its failure and make the Lebanese people accountable for moral and material damages – making any reformist an accomplice to corrupt politicians.
    So electors must choose the “good alternate” to represent them and fulfill their ambitions for reform. This is our responsibility in this dramatic and difficult situation that Lebanon is passing through. The Lebanese must be able to practice their democratic voting rights and must hold all officials accountable for their misdoings.
    Then, and only the, we will deserve to be “the Great People of Lebanon.”

Share This Page