Mohammad Sammak: Hezbollah is wrong like the Sunnis in the 1970s, ‘national unity is paramount’
Without a ceasefire and full implementation of UN Resolution 1701, Lebanon remains in a political stalemate. Iranian pressure prevents House Speaker Nabih Berry from freeing himself from Hezbollah's grip. Invited to the Vatican for the Synod on Lebanon in 1995 and the one on the Middle East in 2010, the senior Sunni leader tells AsiaNews that he hopes Lebanon will learn from past tragedies, and return to the Arab fold through the Saudi "gateway".
Beirut (AsiaNews) – “National unity is paramount over all else. This is the great lesson that our civil war (1975-1990) taught us. By deciding, alone, to defend the Palestinian cause, on 8 October, by opening a front with Israel motivated by an ideology from beyond the borders of Lebanon, Hezbollah made the same mistake that the Sunni community did in the 1970s.
This is the essence of the message of Mohammad Sammak, one of the most authoritative voices in Lebanon’s Sunni community. His political opinion echoes that of Prime Minister Nagib Mikati, who is also Sunni.
On 4 October, in a joint statement with Nabih Berry, Speaker of the House, and Walid Jumblatt, the undisputed leader of the Druze community, Mikati came out in favour of Lebanon agreeing to the ceasefire proposal that French President Emmanuel Macron made on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, dissociating the Lebanese front from the ongoing war in Gaza.
He pledged on behalf of Lebanon to deploy the Lebanese army on the border as soon as a ceasefire comes into effect in accordance with Security Council resolution 1701 (which ended the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel); afterwards, he also voted in favour of the opening of a parliamentary session without conditions for the election of a consensual president, a post that has been vacant for two years.
A few days later, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, and the speaker of the Iranian Shura (Parliament) landed in Lebanon to force the hand of the country’s prime minister and the speaker of parliament, to oppose these orientations.
"No" to the dissociation between the Lebanese front and the Gaza front, Tehran decreed, on behalf of a decapitated Hezbollah. "No" to the presidential election as long as the war continues, Hezbollah's number two, Naim Qassem, who has gone into hiding, said in a video. Thus, Iran plunged Lebanon back into war and a constitutional crisis, for an indefinite period.
With respect to these issues, AsiaNews spoke with Mohammad Sammak (88), a symbol of moderation, a graduate in political science from the American University of Beirut (AUB), a man who was an observer at two synods, on Lebanon (1995) and the Middle East (2012), and who has the ear of both Dar el-Fatwa and Bkerké.
Dr Sammak, what do you think of the current situation?
Human, moral and political solidarity with the people of Gaza is quite natural. The Vatican was the first to express it. But the decision to enter into a war in support of Gaza is another matter entirely. First, the decision to go to war is the prerogative of the state and not of a party. Secondly, war depends on careful calculations and a balance of forces that cannot be made by groups outside Lebanon's borders.
In this regard, Lebanon went through a defining experience in the 1970s, when the solidarity of Lebanon's Muslims with the Palestinians prevailed over national unity. We paid a very high price for it. We learnt from this experience that the decision on peace and war belongs to the state, and that a decision taken outside this sovereign framework is without value or significance.
Hezbollah’s unilateral decision was taken in accordance with an Iranian and not a Lebanese strategy. We are now paying an exorbitant price for this. But it was possible to avoid it had we learnt the lesson of the previous experience.
The support of France and the Vatican
France, which is present in UNIFIL, seems to be the only country trying to help us. What hope do you draw for from it?
Lebanon cannot do without international support. France understands and support this more than any other nation. Between the Vatican's sympathy for our cause and French efforts, I hope we find the conditions for a way out of the crisis. But impasses follow one another and become more and more complex. Alas, I also see an obstinacy in error, and a persistent refusal to pay the price for a necessary correction of this error.
What do you expect from the speaker of the parliament? Do you think he can dissociate himself from Hezbollah on the essential issue of the continuation of the war?
I have already answered this question. But Nabih Berry is a supremely pragmatic man. His long experience in power allows him to be flexible in the search for a solution. The role he can play is irreplaceable.
Are you one of those who fear that the if the internal exodus continues, it will set host communities against the Shia community?
I hope that God will spare Lebanon this time bomb, and that the confrontation with Israel will not lead to internal discord. I think we have learnt from past experiences that such a development must be avoided at all costs.
Mr Sammak refrains from giving an answer on the chances of Saad Hariri, the leader of the Future Movement, returning to active politics in view of the evolution of the internal situation. However, on the political presence of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in Lebanon, he said: "In return for its help and friendship, Saudi Arabia received only negative responses in the past. Hezbollah experts in Yemen have been closely associated with the bombing of parts of the Kingdom. You can imagine its leaders’ huge disappointment in the face of these aggressions that the powerless Lebanese state was not able to prevent.
Today, at the humanitarian level, the kingdom has overcome this disappointment and taken the initiative to send Lebanon a first shipment of medical aid. But Lebanon must change its policy and return to the principle of solidarity with the Arab world, whose gateway is Saudi Arabia.
.png)
