Between October 2019 and its counterpart in 2020, the Lebanese lived an exceptional year, which began with the launch of popular movements that swept the country since the 17th of this month, 2019, but it faced political developments and events that put it before difficult challenges, after the ruling authority bet on its failure.
On that night, hundreds of Lebanese took to the streets of Beirut spontaneously, to protest the imposition of a monthly telecommunications tax of $ 6 on the application of "WhatsApp", and although the Ministry of Communications at the time retracted its tax decision, it did not curb the anger of the Lebanese, who woke up on the morning of October 18 The first of 2019 was due to the widespread popular movements that spread throughout Lebanon.
During this year, which is also the anniversary of the first centenary of the establishment of Greater Lebanon (1920), the Lebanese passed through many stations that formed a pivotal turning point, and many saw in it a foundational stage for Lebanon's new centenary.
Days after the start of the movement, the government of Prime Minister Saad Hariri fell on October 29, 2019, the Lebanese pound continued to deteriorate, thousands of institutions closed, unemployment increased, and banks took harsh measures against depositors.
Subsequently, Hassan Diab's government was formed on January 21, and then the momentum in the streets gradually decreased, until the port explosion came on August 4, 2020;
He destroyed Beirut, killing more than 200 victims and thousands of wounded. Then Diab’s government resigned on the tenth of August, Lebanon entered a new phase, and his rescue became suspended in the hope of the success of the “French initiative” and the formation of a new “important” government.
These developments - and others - have put the demanding movement in Lebanon facing difficult challenges, after the ruling authority had gambled on its failure.
In a quick review of the October 17 protests, Al-Jazeera Net interviewed a number of activists, academics and analysts to ask: Has the broader movement of the demands of Lebanon's uncle failed?
Who bears the responsibility?
This year coincides with the centenary of the establishment of Greater Lebanon 1920 (Al-Jazeera)
"October 17" continues and does not fail
Lawyer and political activist Wasif Harak rejects the accusation of Hirak on October 17th of failure, and believes that it is still continuing, as evidenced by the confusion of the pillars of the authority and its inability to formulate any agreement to save it from its predicament at home and abroad.
The movement believes that the October 17 uprising came to say that the regime in Lebanon has lost its reasons for existence, and the real battle is in favor of building a civil state.
On the other hand, he believes that there have been failures in the movement, "without making it responsible for the failure, because this undermines the scale of the event."
Among these failures - according to the movement - that the opposition forces in the street did not succeed in crystallizing a formula within a single framework, and did not improve the rapprochement with each other, and every gain it achieved was losing its dynamism because it did not build upon it well in the face of the authority that succeeded in pummeling the movement until In its most vulnerable moment.
And because the ruling authority has been rooted in the Lebanese system for 30 years, it was able - according to a movement - to penetrate the movement, despite its ability to expose partisans and intruders just to raise the slogan "everyone means all".
As for the most important strengths of the popular movement - as the movement says - it was a shifting sand that strikes community sites of the authority in the regions and peripheries, so the decentralization of the uprising was one of its most important achievements, and “what we seek in the next phase is for it to expand horizontally, but it needs to be done. Learn from past mistakes, "says Movement.
The October 17 protests began spontaneously and were then penetrated by various political forces (Al-Jazeera)
The Hezbollah problem divided the movement
As for the professor of political science at the American University, Michel Douaihy believes that one of the positive aspects of the movement is that the Lebanese have transcended sectarianism, regionalism and classism as concepts that have governed their lives over the past 30 years.
However, what failed the October 17 protests was the escape from politics, with the emergence of the Hezbollah problem, and the lack of consensus on how to deal with it.
According to Al-Douaihy, the groups were divided between those who want to neutralize Hezbollah from the confrontation and exclude it from the slogan "everyone means all", and those who consider that the origin of the confrontation is with the party as it is the strongest sponsor of the ruling system.
The problem of Hezbollah has caused the popular movement to regress, according to Douaihy, who considers that "any movement in Lebanon will not succeed if it wants to neutralize Hezbollah."
He said that what was required was a consistent position by the party and not facing it in the street.
Therefore, "some groups went to the dispute with the governor of the Banque du Liban, Riad Salameh, at a time when Salameh is part of the problem and not the root of it, which lies with the custodians of the covenant and the system."
Al-Douaihy notes that the October 17 movement ended with its romance, as he put it, when the Hassan Diab government gained confidence on February 11, 2020, and this was accompanied by excessive violence in the street against the demonstrators, and then the outbreak of the Corona epidemic, which led people to fear and retreat .
Accordingly, Douaihy believes that completing the course of the uprising cannot be achieved by the previous Carnival scene, and considers that the movement faces various challenges, as a result of the system’s endeavor to return to its beautiful time before the date of October 17, 2019, by forming a government with Saad Hariri.
The deterioration of the economic situation was the cause of the outbreak of the movement of 17 October 2019 (Al-Jazeera)
"October 17th" failed and ended
On the other hand, writers and political analyst Wassim Bazzi (who is close to Hezbollah) believes that the moment of October 17 was spontaneous and crossed the Lebanese sects and regions, but it was a situation that only lasted a few weeks, before a set of factors changed distorted the course of the movements.
Bazzi rejects the accusation of Hezbollah and its allies of suppressing the demonstrators, and considers that the popular masses of these parties were provoked after political forces entered the line of movement, such as the Lebanese Forces and Phalanges, as well as the Future Movement accused of corrupting its political heritage, Bazzi said.
The fundamental reason for the downfall of the October 17 movement - according to Bazzi - lies in the inability of the movement’s groups to go forward to presenting a political project that has integrated dimensions and goals.
Bazzi said, "Every time the Hirak groups tried to take on this challenge, they were overcome by divisions, subjectivity and contradictory tendencies, and they fled from leadership merit, so that their weak representative size was not revealed."
And he believes that the external factor was able to infiltrate the movement through international organizations (NGO), to impose the agendas of its suspicious countries, especially America.
He added that the popular movement tried to remove the public space from the environment of the resistance, before Hezbollah succeeded in containing it.
As for the red lines laid down by the party’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, they were to protect civil peace and the political forces produced by the 2018 elections (the main core), and to preserve public and private property that was subjected to violations by the demonstrators, according to Bazzi.
Accordingly, the October 17 movement failed and ended in its first form.
As for Hezbollah, "it realizes that the Lebanese system needs reforms and a new reading that will benefit from through the past, but one of its most important approaches is that Lebanon is not taken by the will of one party, and it is only governed by partnership. Its problem is not that it is the strongest in the equation of partnership, but rather the problem of others is their weakness." , Bazzi said.
Imposing a political map
Ibrahim Mneimneh, engineer and political activist in the movement, believes that the problem of the October 17 movement lies in the fact that his groups were unable to impose a political map or organizational framework for them, in order to move to the stage of systematic movement with political goals that can maneuver.
Nevertheless, Mneimneh believes that the popular movement has succeeded in showing the state of rejection experienced by the Lebanese towards the political authority.
He said that the authority succeeded in attempts to exploit the movement and abort it, after it realized its spontaneous nature, and succeeded in penetrating the slogan "everyone means all", and worked to dismantle it.
And because the movement was not crystallized with an inclusive political discourse, people lost hope and stopped taking to the streets, according to Mneimneh.
They were also affected by the rhetoric of the political forces that intimidated the demonstrators, and the use of traitorous speech by describing the movement's groups as a "group of embassies."
In order for the October 17 movement to regain its momentum in this difficult phase, Mneimneh believes that it is imperative for opposition political groups to draw up a map of demands and reforms, and to produce a political discourse that expresses the people's demands to achieve political change, and indicates that there are fronts and organizational frameworks that are being launched. Because people in Lebanon want something clear and specific, to define the problem and determine ways to confront it.