In early August of this year the Armenian community ofLebanonfound itself at the center the country's extremely tangled and deadlocked political maelstrom. Late in the evening of Sunday, August 5th,Amin Gemayel,Lebanon's former President and Supreme President of the Christian Phalange Party, during a direct T.V. broadcast, made a series a bitterly piercing and intolerant statements directed at the Lebanese-Armenian community in general and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) in particular.

Just minutes before it became apparent that he lost that day's parliamentary by-election in the Metn electoral district by a small margin.

A large number of Armenians reside in that electoral district and it's where the ARF-controlled heavily Armenian populated neighborhood of Bourj Hammoud is located. An overwhelming number of Armenians who voted cast their ballots for Gemayel's opponent Camille Khoury, a member of the political team of General Michel Aoun, the army's former Commander-in-Chief and main leader of the Christian opposition. The Armenian vote was influenced by the appeals made by the ARF and that party's overall organizational apparatus.

In mainly attributing his defeat to the stance taken by the Armenians, the former President cast doubts on the civil rights of the Lebanese-Armenians by noting that,” Armenians should not dictate the wishes of Metn.” Gemayel stated that, “I find it unacceptable that the ARF should steal away the votes of the true Christians of Metn.” Thus, he was actually implying that he viewed Armenians as second-class Christians. He accused the ARF of engaging in widespread electoral fraud in Bourj Hammoud and demanded to hold new elections there.

The clear anger and vindictiveness conveyed in these statements shook the Lebanese-Armenian community to its core and sent shockwaves throughout the country's political landscape. Appearing on the same television broadcast, Hagop Pakradouny, an ARF member of the Lebanese Parliament, immediately countered the statements of the former President. During the following days the ARF leadership repeatedly condemned Gemayel's television appearance and demanded that he formally apologize for his statements. On August 6 th CatholicosAramI of the Great House of Cilicia issued a release in which it specifically stated...

“Let no one assume the right to cast aspersions on the dignity of Lebanese-Armenians. Whilst I can understand the sometimes heated and misplaced statements made during the electoral process, I cannot condone the false and baseless accusations made by some directed at the Armenian community. All know the history and national character ofLebanon's Armenians. The Armenians of Lebanon have no need to receive lessons in patriotism from anyone. The Armenians ofLebanon, in and of themselves, are the embodiment of patriotism.”

Christian and Muslim community leaders and political forces opposed to Gemayel wasted no time in condemning his statements, often describing them as racist. Those condemning Gemayel included General Aoun; Nabih Berri, Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament and one of the political leaders of the Shia Muslim community; and the leadership of Hezbollah.

For their part, representatives of the Gemayel camp, while not openly condemning his statements, attempted to smooth-over the ensuing political fallout by expressing favorable opinions regarding the Armenian community. While Amin Gemayel realized his outbursts, though expressing his genuine feelings, were nevertheless caused by the stress of his electoral defeat, he also understood the possible political ramifications of such heartfelt statements and in turn engaged in damage control by downplaying the insensitive remarks he made regarding the Armenian community. But he continued to accuse the ARF of election fraud.

On August 8 th he paid a visit to CatholicosAramI and said, “I personally haven't made statements against the Armenian community. What I said only related to the elections.”

The leadership of the ARF inLebanon, however, viewed his visit to the Catholicos of Cilicia to be insufficient and continued to demand that Gemayel apologize for what he said. The former Lebanese President failed to do so, but said that he wanted to turn the page. Since then the uproar has been defused, but its implications remain.

An August 5 th by-election also took place inBeirut's 2 nd electoral district. Both by-elections were designed to replace two MPs slain during the preceding months. One of the murdered parliamentarians was Amin Gemayel's son Pierre. The father wished to be elected to that vacant seat. Gemayel lost the election by only 418 votes. Against 39,534 votes garnered by his opponent Camille Khoury, the ex-president garnered 39,116 ballots.

Of the 10,000 Lebanese-Armenians that went to the ballot box, 8,000 voted for Khoury and 2,000 for Gemayel. Undoubtedly the stance adopted by the ARF and these 8,000 Armenian votes played a major role in Khoury's victory. Equally decisive however were the more than 31,000 other votes cast for the winner, especially those cast by the followers of Michel Murr, an erstwhile ally of the Phalange Party and Gemayel. This veteran political player, while not a member of General Aoun's movement, allied himself with Aoun, just as the ARF did. Surprisingly, while Gemayel lambasted Armenians and the ARF, which for many years had been a loyal ally of his party, he never once mentioned the negative role played by Murr and his followers.

However farfetched it may seem, the Metn by-elections have significance not only for the future of internal Lebanese politics but for theUSA–Iranshowdown in the Middle East as well. This factor also explains the anger expressed by Gemayel.

Lebanon, which is in the throes of an intricate political crisis, is due to elect a new president this fall. Both Amin Gemayel and General Michel Aoun have their eyes on this prize. A win by Gemayel would be interpreted as a victory, if perhaps only fleeting, forUnited Statespolicy inLebanonand partially in the widerMiddle East. On the other hand, an Aoun presidency would signify a defeat of said American policy and a possible stimulus for Iranian and Syrian interests.

According to the opinion of independent observers, the results of the Metn by-elections show that both Aoun and Gemayel have lost their former authority and that both have no real chance of being elected president. Gemayel has no chance because he failed to be elected even as a member of parliament. On the other hand, Aoun's candidate won by only the slimmest of margins and proves that his following within the Christian community has also suffered. However the struggle between these political camps and their supporters on the outside will continue to unfold. In this context, the significance of the ARF's political stance and the voting patterns of its Armenian supporters proved to be more newsworthy than the by-election itself.

Aram Tovmasyan