FARID ABBOUD: A MAN OF LITTLE CHARACTER
By: Dr. Joseph Hitti
Edgartown, Massachusetts
22 April 2004
At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge yesterday, members of the
Lebanese American community were graced first-hand with the utterly annoying spectacle of
Mr. Farid Abboud, a rather insignificant man posing as the Ambassador of Lebanon, speaking
to a mostly Lebanese-American audience. We had to put up with an hour of this political
dwarf praising the Lebanese for their achievements in the Diaspora when his own government
continues to push more young Lebanese out of the country day after day because of human
rights violations, a defunct economy, a dire lack of opportunities, and rampant
corruption. Not to mention the permanent state of war imposed on Lebanon by the Syrian
occupation that appointed Mr. Abboud himself to represent Lebanon in Washington DC. This
was the ultimate bureaucrat, stepping straight out of a surreal Kafka novel. This was a
man with no character, who appeared gleeful to have "arrived", to have made it
thanks to his willingness to work as a collaborator on behalf of a foreign country whose
stated objective is to dismantle Lebanon as a state and annex it. Indeed, people who
"make it", like Mr. Abboud, often do so by selling their principles, by
compromising on everything, by not standing up to any belief or conviction because deep
down they have none.
Speaking with the meandering tongue of a black market dealer trying to rob his audience of
a few pennies of sympathy, this mercenary spoke a lot of "compromises" and
"managing problems". He never spoke of principles, aspirations, courage, and
hope for a better future. Not once did he speak with the conviction of a man who has a
vision for his country. He, in fact, fumbled when a young Lebanese woman asked him a
simple question: How permanent or temporary did the Ambassador think Taef would be? He
paused for a long moment, and then mumbled an incoherent answer, as I imagined his mind
rummaging for an answer that would not get him in trouble with his masters back in the
occupied homeland.
Speaking with the hushed tone and shifty eyes of someone who is carefully watching every
word he was saying, and of course, his back, this mercurial and spineless snake took no
clear position on any of the issues that confront Lebanon today, telling his young
Lebanese-American audience that the Lebanese people's aspirations and hopes are irrelevant
in this day and age. Rather, he advised his audience to look at everything through his own
lens of the mercantile dealer: A ledger of accounts. There are pros and cons to
everything, this traitor-turned-Confucius said, and when all of Lebanon's problems are
analyzed through this revolutionary prism, one ought to reach the same conclusions as Mr.
Abboud: All of Lebanon's predicaments for the past 40 years are, on balance, positive
developments to be proud of.
On balance, the ambassador said that the Syrian occupation is positive even as, by his own
admission, there are corrupt Syrians who are robbing the country blind in collusion with
their corrupt Lebanese counterparts, and Lebanon's young people continue to leave the
country in droves because of it. The Syrian occupation of Lebanon is not an
"occupation", he argued. It is merely an "interference", he said, and
to back his argument, Mr. Abboud claimed that every country interferes in every other
country's affairs. That is normal, he said. Why are people surprised with Syria
interfering in Lebanon? Israel, he said, interferes in US politics because of the nature
of the US political system, an allusion to the much-repeated Syrian argument that the
Jewish lobby steers US policy in favor of Israel. The US interferes in the affairs of the
Gulf States with the military bases it has there. But his own cunning Lebanese government,
the ambassador said, is "managing" the Syrian interference. He obviously could
not tell his audience, though, how long will this "managing" go on because, by
definition, a puppet cannot ask its puppeteer to set it free. Nor did he mention that the
Syrian "interference" involves a military occupation, the illegal detention and
extradition of hundreds of innocent Lebanese to Syria where they spend decades in Syria's
notorious prisons without due process and many never come back, and the direct appointment
of presidents, prime ministers, and members of parliament.
On balance, the man said that the moribund Lebanese economy is quite positive, even
though, in his own words, the national debt continues to grow at alarming rates and
Lebanon's main resource, its people, are lining up at Western embassies for immigrant
visas. He said that the Lebanese are very good at destroying things, in reference to the
war years, but they are also very good at rebuilding them. He failed to specify that
downtown Beirut was rebuilt with Prime Minister Rafik Hariri's own money, which he lent to
the country after extorting the real estate out of its rightful owners, thus imposing a
debt of 40 Billion dollars that will haunt future generations of young Lebanese. The
ambassador also failed to say that only downtown Beirut was rebuilt as a façade to
attract investors, leaving the rest of the country in shambles, and truly insulting the
investors' intelligence who know that as long as Syria and its collaborators are
"managing" the country, they will not put a single penny down in long term
instruments. All the investments that are paraded by the collaborator regime as success
stories are short-term, and if MacDonald's and Starbucks were eager to sell their
blandness in downtown Beirut, they will as eagerly pack and leave, and they should not be
seen as positive developments for the long term recovery of the country. So Beirut, the
man said, is now rebuilt, as if refurbishing a few buildings and cleaning a few streets
were substitutes for rebuilding confidence in the hearts of the Lebanese people or in the
minds of investors or healing the scars of the Syrian War on Lebanon while the Syrian army
and the Syrian Mukhabarat Intelligence Services freely roam the country and appoint its
governments. In answer to a question from the audience about why does a driver's permit
cost $200 in Lebanon, an amount equal to the minimum wage there, the man's tongue spoke
faster than his mind and he said with a smart smile on his face: "Oh, you can get it
cheaper, you know
.". Here was the Ambassador of Lebanon to the US advocating
the use of bribes, a common practice in his corrupt government's institutions and
administrations, to get a simple driver's permit. And I wondered to myself how much money
did he have to pay or whose hands did he have to kiss to get the post of Ambassador in
Washington?
On balance, the ambassador said that the advent of the terrorist organization Hezbollah is
a positive development for Lebanon, even though Hezbollah 's Iranian-funded,
Syrian-sponsored, futile war in the south is by far the main reason for the
destabilization of the country for the past 2 decades, and is directly responsible for the
death of thousands of innocent Lebanese civilians, in addition to 241 US Marines, 58
French paratroopers and hundreds of other foreigners in their bombed embassies. Mr. Abboud
admitted that Hezbollah was a problem, but his government was, again, "managing"
this problem with the wishful thinking of collaborators who want us to believe that one
day Hezbollah would by itself drop its weapons, become civilized, stop advocating the
establishment of a an Islamic State in a country that is half Christian, and end its
violent and irrational exploitation of Islam for the destabilization of Lebanon under the
Syrian Baath regime's sponsorship.
On balance, Mr. Abboud stated that the Taef Agreement was a good compromise. Not everyone
liked it, but it was good. Never mind that Taef was a compromise on the sovereignty of
Lebanon that ultimately legitimized or exacerbated all the other problems that the
Ambassador discussed. He failed to see any connection between all these problems, speaking
as if they were separate and independent of each other, when in reality the Syrian
occupation as legitimized by the Taef Agreement is the glue that holds Lebanon hostage to
the Syrian regime's ultimate satisfaction in a solution to the Middle East conflict and
keeps all Lebanon's problems unresolved.
Not once did the ambassador make reference to international law or to United Nations
resolutions that call for the withdrawal of all foreign armies from Lebanon. Not once did
he make reference to the obligation that Lebanon has to send its troops to the border and
secure this border against illegal incursions and attacks by private foreign-funded
militias that threaten the security of the country. Not once did this diplomat speak of
Lebanon and Syria negotiating their relations as two equally sovereign states. Not once
did the ambassador mention that Syria rejects the existence of Lebanon as an independent
country, as evidenced by Syria's continued refusal to exchange embassies between the two
otherwise sovereign countries.
On balance, I concluded, Mr. Abboud is himself an undignified diplomat whose tenure in
Washington DC seriously compromises relations between Lebanon and the US. The man had
nothing of substance to say, and he said nothing that we did not know. Perhaps, and
although obviously content with his role as a petty bureaucrat, there is a redeeming value
to the man. Perhaps, somewhere in his tormented conscience, he may find solace in playing
the role of the unwilling collaborator since even under occupation bureaucrats are needed
to manage the otherwise sinking ship. But that is exactly where a man's mettle is tested:
It is at moments like this in the history of their country that little men and great men
distinguish themselves, the former in submitting to, and "managing", the
anomaly, and the latter in having the courage to reject it and call it for what it is, an
anomaly. And in this ledger of accounts, Mr. Abboud, the ambassador of Lebanon in
Washington DC, is a big con for his country.