A Comparison Between The Christians Of Syria And Lebanon, By EHSANI2

A comparison Between The Christians of Syria and Lebanon

By EHSANI2,

June 14, 2006

Rather than sharing common goals like most other minorities in the region, Syrian and Lebanese Christians seem to be at odds with each other when it comes to assessing their political survival. Nowhere is this more apparent than the way each community supports or condemns the current regime in Damascus.

The difference in the two communities stems from the following fact:

While the Lebanese Christians have traditionally been politically engaged, Syrian Christians in contrast have chosen to stay on the fringes of their country’ political life. While the former group has resisted the various regional pressures to weaken their political influence, the latter has made the choice to play it safe and stay out of politics. While the former has largely called for outside help to ensure its survival, Syrian Christians have aligned their fortunes with the survival of their regime instead.

Let me now elaborate

Syrian Christians seem to overwhelmingly believe that in spite of all of their regime’s shortfalls, the alternative would most likely be far worse. More specifically, they seem convinced that a more Islamist leaning group will follow the downfall of this regime, an event that will inevitably end up destroying their coveted way of life. For the record, the size of this community has steadily fallen as a percentage of the total population. From a high of 25%, this percentage is estimated to have fallen to as low as 10%.

It is widely believed that the Syrian Sunni community is divided along lines of income and religious fervor. The Sunnis who have aligned their business interests to those of the regime may not be too keen to lose their immense advantages. They may, therefore, be inclined to support the status quo. But, this group does not represent the majority. The more likely profile of a Sunni Syrian is one that dreams of a day when one of their own is finally in charge. We are frequently told that Syrians are not very religious. A change in the regime, therefore, is unlikely to cause a major shift in the seemingly secular nature of this society.

It is my belief that the Syrian Christians do not share this view. Instead, they are more inclined to view their Sunni fellow countrymen as more devout and religious than the consensus opinion. Given the choice, the Sunni community is believed to be willing to accept being governed by a religious establishment. Left to their wishes, therefore, Syria’s majority will most likely accept a sharper tilt in the direction of religioun were this regime to fall. When this happens, Syria’s Christians fear that they will lose a list of social privileges that they currently hold so dear. This list includes the right to worship, dress, drink and party as they wish. It also includes of course internal law and order.

While the above list is important, political aspirations and active engagement in the country’s political future is critically missing from this list. Since the French departed the country after independence, Syrian Christians have suffered a steady loss in political activism. When their own country’s constitution stated that the President of Syria must be a Muslim, they quietly accepted being excluded from ever participating as equals. In effect, they failed to complain or resist being third class citizens in their own country. Presumably, they felt that it was best to carry on doing what they have done for decades-stay on the sidelines and play it safe. So long as they could go to church, avoid wearing a veil, drink their Scotch and dine outdoors, life was perfectly acceptable.

Given this regime’s non-Islamist tendencies, a soft marriage of convenience was born between the Alawi regime and the country’s Christian minority. Stated differently, the Christian community outsourced its own security and the protection of its way of life to this Alawi regime. Without any political or military aspirations that would act as a future threat, the regime was more than happy to implicitly agree to protect this less than powerful partner.

Lebanese Christians in contrast have worked hard to protect the huge privileges that they were afforded after independence. Camille Chamoun’s epic encounter with the powerful Nasser in 1958 was a case in point. With the help of American marines, he was able to defeat the Pan Arabists that were backed by Nasser. Since then, Lebanon’s history has been rife with examples where that country’s Christian community had to endure immense regional pressures to weaken its grip on power. While the Taef accords succeeded in taking away a significant number these privileges, the fact remains that the community has been steadfast in its resistance to the forces that are heavily stacked against it. This political activism stands in direct contrast with the apolitical Christians of Syria. It is worth reiterating that the Christians of Lebanon would not have been able to survive and maintain their influence had they not accepted the help of foreigners. This has included the French, Americans and even the state of Israel. Given the Syrian Christian community’s more Pan Arabist leanings, such foreign adventures by the Lebanese Christians have acted as a major contentious point between the two communities.

In conclusion, while the Syrian Christians have supported this regime for a list of valid reasons, the fact remains that they have effectively aligned their long-term survival to the survival of the regime itself. This is a highly dangerous and shortsighted strategy.

Were the Damascus regime to fall, the country’s Christian community will undoubtedly suffer immensely. Such fears explain the significant increase in the number of people that have decided to immigrate to the west when given the opportunity. Anyone with the economic means to do so has opted to deliver their new babies in countries like Canada or the U.S in the hope of gaining an alternative “safe” passport. This trend has been in force for decades and is likely to continue. The plight of Iraqi Christians since the fall of Saddam has reinforced such fears. Christian friends are often heard saying, “We have no future here. This country is not ours in the future”. By outsourcing their own security and the protection of their lifestyle to the regime rather than being politically active themselves, this country’s Christians may believe that they have been well served thus far. Their future prospects, however, are highly uncertain. Were the regime to fall, some will choose to stay and accept their different lifestyles. Others may decide to leave. One highly probable destination of course will be Lebanon. Odds are that the Christians of this country will survive longer in this region. Decades of political engagement, personal sacrifice, friendlier constitution, and alliances with outside forces may end up attracting those fleeing Christians next door.