logo
Lebanon's civil war fighters working for reconciliation, 50 years on

Lebanon's civil war fighters working for reconciliation, 50 years on

Yahoo10-04-2025
Near front lines where they once battled each other, former fighters in Lebanon's civil war now gather to bear the same message, half a century after the devastating conflict erupted: never again.
The war killed 150,000 people, destroyed the country and left an indelible mark on the Lebanese psyche.
Years after it ended in 1990, some buildings in the freewheeling capital remain riddled with bullet holes, and 17,000 people who went missing were never found.
"It was a useless war," said Georges Mazraani, a Christian who took up arms in Beirut's working-class neighbourhood of Ain al-Remmaneh, where the conflict started.
The Christian district is separated from the Muslim neighbourhood of Shiyah by just one street that went on to become a key front line.
On April 13, 1975, members of the right-wing Christian Phalange militia machine-gunned a bus of Palestinians, leaving 27 dead, hours after assailants opened fire outside a nearby church, killing one of theirs.
The incident that ignited the war remains seared in Lebanon's memory.
- 'Reconciliation' -
The country had been on a knife-edge, with Palestinian fighters, and their Lebanese leftist and Muslim allies preparing for a confrontation against Christian groups, who were doing the same.
For 15 years, a country once known as "the Switzerland of the Middle East" was ravaged by war along sectarian lines, with alliances shifting year after year with warlords building and breaking loyalties.
And while the civil war ended in 1990, Lebanon has never recovered its former glory, remaining until 2005 under Syrian control, and with part of the country under Israeli occupation for two decades.
Now grey, Mazraani was just 21 when he and other young men in his neighbourhood took up arms. He later went on to command hundreds of fighters.
"I lost 17 years of my life and 14 family members," he said, now 71 and ill.
Near him plaques commemorating the "martyrs" of the Christian "resistance" adorn street corners.
Today, "some people are encouraging civil war in Lebanon", Mazraani said.
"They should be quiet and open up to reconciliation, so we can be finished with this problem."
- 'Ask for forgiveness' -
With Mazraani is Nassim Assaad, who fought for the Lebanese Communist Party, a onetime foe.
"It's the poor" on both sides "who paid the price", not the militia leaders, said Assaad, who was 18 when the war began.
He and Mazraani are now part of Fighters for Peace, which brings together former enemies for peace-building activities including community outreach and awareness-raising at schools and universities.
Assaad said many people were worried about a possible return to civil war in the country still reeling from a recent conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
"Today, the circumstances are even more conducive for it than in 1975," he said.
The key issue dividing Lebanon today is the arsenal of Hezbollah, the only group which refused to surrender its weapons to the state after the civil war ended.
In Shiyah, the fighters of old have disappeared.
Israel's 1982 invasion and siege of Beirut dislodged Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and his fighters, while the leftist presence was replaced by Hezbollah, created with Iranian backing that year to fight the Israeli troops.
The civil war ended with the Saudi-brokered Taif agreement, which established a new power-sharing system between Lebanon's religious sects.
An amnesty for war crimes left victims and their families without justice, and the country has chosen collective amnesia in order to move on.
"We must go back over our experience of war and ask for forgiveness in order to reach a real reconciliation," said Ziad Saab, president of Fighters for Peace.
The power-sharing system was meant to be temporary, but in practice has enshrined the control of some former warlords, who swapped their military fatigues for suits, or their family members.
Still today, periodic violence shakes the fragile balance.
- 'Lessons of the past' -
In the town of Souk al-Gharb, overlooking Beirut, former fighters from different backgrounds walk through grass covering the old front line to an abandoned bunker.
The strategic town saw ferocious battles during the Mountain War between Christians and Druze that began in the wake of the Israeli invasion.
"When I walk here, I'm afraid -- not of mines, but because the ground is stained with the blood of my comrades," said Soud Bou Shebl, 60, who fought with Christian militia the Lebanese Forces.
Karam al-Aridi, 63, who led Druze fighters from the Progressive Socialist Party, said "war only causes death and problems", saying his village of Baysur alone lost 140 men.
"We must learn the lessons of the past," he said. "No party must feel stronger than another, otherwise our country will be lost."
at/lg/it/ser
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

IDF conducts airstrikes on south Lebanon against Hezbollah terror targets
IDF conducts airstrikes on south Lebanon against Hezbollah terror targets

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

IDF conducts airstrikes on south Lebanon against Hezbollah terror targets

"There are no unusual instructions for the civilian area. All planned events are approved as scheduled. We will provide updates on any changes," the Upper Galilee Council stated. The Israel Air Force conducted airstrikes in southern Lebanon on Wednesday night, the military confirmed. The IDF said that it struck Hezbollah weapons storage facilities, a missile launcher, and Hezbollah terrorist infrastructure that stored engineering tools. "The Hezbollah terrorist organization continues attempting to reestablish terrorist infrastructure throughout Lebanon using the Lebanese population as human shields. The presence of weapons and the activity of Hezbollah in the area constitute a violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon," an IDF spokesperson's unit statement read. Upper Galilee residents informed of updates Maariv reported that Air Force jets conducted multiple waves of strikes in an hour. The sound of explosions was heard throughout the Galilee region, and regional councils told residents that the security situation remained the same. "At this time, intense strikes have begun in the Lebanon sector as part of enforcement efforts. There is no change in policy. There are no unusual instructions for the civilian area. All planned events are approved as scheduled. We will provide updates on any changes," the Upper Galilee Council stated. Last night, the Lebanese government introduced a measure to establish a monopoly on weapons in the country in order to promote Hezbollah's disarmament. Hezbollah claimed that the move was made due to pressure from US mediators to support peace with Israel. 'The Nawaf Salam government has committed a grave sin with a decision that leaves Lebanon without resistance weapons against the Israeli enemy. The government's decision was made due to demands from the American ambassador, and it fully serves Israel, leaving Lebanon exposed to the enemy with no deterrence.'

S.F. school district to teachers: Your political opinions don't belong in the classroom
S.F. school district to teachers: Your political opinions don't belong in the classroom

San Francisco Chronicle​

time6 hours ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

S.F. school district to teachers: Your political opinions don't belong in the classroom

Days before the start of classes, San Francisco school leaders reminded teachers that they can't express political opinions during the school day, including in what they say, wear or what they put on their walls. District officials encouraged principals to reinforce those restrictions as educators and staff participated in back-to-school training this week. The guidance follows a divisive battle last school year over accusations of political activism among educators in city schools, particularly in ethnic studies courses. Controversial activities included teachers encouraging students to write letters to Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther sentenced to death in 1981 for murdering a Philadelphia police officer, or asking them to participate in anti-Israel protests. In other cases, teachers hung pro-Palestinian posters in classrooms, or described Israel as colonizers committing genocide. While the laws and policies are not new, they have been often ignored or absent from staff training sessions. District officials, last year, gave principals the materials to train staff on bias and personal opinions, but it was unclear how many used them. This year, one veteran teacher said it was the first such training in their career. 'Many teachers have been dangerously misled about their professional freedoms and responsibilities,' the educator said. 'K-12 teachers don't have the same academic freedoms as university instructors. Our students are minor children.' The district's teachers union, which has taken a pro-Palestinian stance and has advocated for teachers who wish to speak out about the war in Gaza, did not immediately return requests for comment about the training. In February, officials from the union wrote in a pro-Palestinian resolution that 'educators who utilized their democratic rights to speak out against the war were repressed or harassed by school authorities.' In recent years, Bay Area schools have seen an uptick in politically motivated instruction and the opinions of staff and educators publicly displayed. That has included student walkouts, bolstered by teachers and their unions, as well as posters and staff clothing reflecting beliefs, including candidates, government policies and the war in Gaza. Accusations of antisemitism, Islamophobia and other forms of harassment in schools have grown specifically since the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel in and the retaliatory bombing of Gaza, with hundreds of official complaints filed at the district, state and federal level. District officials said the most recent training was proactive and not punitive and aimed to help staff navigate complex and sensitive topics in a way that aligns with state law and school board policies. 'If parents or students see something they are concerned about they should contact their principal,' said district spokesperson Laura Dudnick. 'When concerns arise, we follow a clear process for reviewing them that is consistent with labor agreements and Board policy.' State education law requires an education free of harassment and bias and equal access to learning regardless of race, religion, national origin or other protected status. But that has been broadly interpreted across public schools in San Francisco and the Bay Area and, at times, rarely enforced. In the spring, San Francisco Superintendent Maria Su vowed to address the issue following community concerns raised specifically about ethnic studies courses and, more broadly, antisemitic content and harassment amid pro-Palestinian activism. 'Teaching should be about teaching students how to think,' not what to think,' she said in June. Su decided to suspend the district's homegrown ethnic studies curriculum, which critics said was divisive, antisemitic and promoted progressive activism. The board in July purchased an off-the-shelf replacement to be used for the year-long required ethnic studies course for ninth graders. In addition, Su is expected to issue an administrative order regarding the use of supplemental materials used by teachers to ensure they adhere to state and district guidelines. The training materials given to principals also notes that employees cannot solicit students or families to further their ideological persuasions or use district resources, including district email, to communicate or advocate for their political opinions. 'Students should be challenged in their coursework and schools should provide a safe and rigorous experience where they can express their thinking and listen to others,' said school board President Phil Kim. 'Our whole job here as educators is to create the conditions for all of that to take place. 'This is what I come back to: What is our responsibility as educators?' he said. 'It's not about us. It's about the kids.'

Full List of Supreme Court Cases to Be Heard This Coming Fall Term
Full List of Supreme Court Cases to Be Heard This Coming Fall Term

Newsweek

time6 hours ago

  • Newsweek

Full List of Supreme Court Cases to Be Heard This Coming Fall Term

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Supreme Court has released its October and November oral argument calendars for the 2025 term. Why It Matters The Supreme Court will begin its 2025 term on October 6. The justices are expected to hear several cases about issues that have drawn public interest, including redistricting and conversion therapy bans. A general overall exterior view of the Supreme Court, Sunday, Jan. 1, 2023, in Washington. A general overall exterior view of the Supreme Court, Sunday, Jan. 1, 2023, in Washington. Aaron M. Sprecher via AP Villareal v. Texas Oral arguments in Villareal v. Texas are scheduled for October 6. The case presents the question of whether a court violates a defendant's right to counsel by prohibiting the defendant and counsel from discussing the defendant's testimony during an overnight recess. The petitioner, David Asa Villareal, was convicted of murder and sentenced to 60 years in prison. Villareal testified during the trial. On the first day of his testimony, the court declared a recess and dismissed the jury due to a previously scheduled administrative commitment. The court instructed Villarreal and his attorneys not to discuss his testimony during the 24-hour recess. "When a defendant confers with his attorney, the defendant's testimony permeates every aspect of counsel's advice," attorneys for Villareal wrote in a petition for a writ of certiorari. "There is no way to separate discussions of testimony from discussions of trial strategy. Prohibiting counsel from discussing the defendant's testimony during an overnight recess is tantamount to preventing counsel from doing his or her job." Berk v. Choy The justices will also hear oral arguments in Berk v. Choy on October 6. The question presented in this case is whether a state law requiring the dismissal of a complaint if it is not accompanied by an expert affidavit may apply in federal court. Chiles v. Salazar The Court will hear arguments in Chiles v. Salazar on October 7. The justices will consider whether a Colorado state law banning conversion therapy for minors by mental health counselors violates free speech rights. The petitioner, Kaley Chiles, is a licensed counselor. "A practicing Christian, Chiles believes that people flourish when they live consistently with God's design, including their biological sex," attorneys for Chiles wrote in a petition for a writ of certiorari. "Many of her clients seek her counsel precisely because they believe that their faith and their relationship with God establishes the foundation upon which to understand their identity and desires. But Colorado bans these consensual conversations based on the viewpoints they express." Attorneys for the respondents said legal precedent holds that the First Amendment permits states to regulate the practice of conversion therapy, "like other unsafe and ineffective health care treatments, even when those treatments involve speech." Barrett v. United States Oral arguments in Barrett v. United States are scheduled for October 7. The petitioner, Dwayne Barrett, was convicted of aiding a robbery by driving the codefendant to the scene, aiding the use of a gun during that robbery, a "crime of violence," and aiding the use of a gun used to kill during a "crime of violence." The justices will consider whether Barrett's sentencing on two charges violated the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment. Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections The justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections on October 8. One petitioner in this case is Representative Mike Bost, a Republican from Illinois. The Court will consider whether the petitioners have presented sufficient factual allegations to challenge state time, place and manner regulations concerning federal elections. Postal Service v. Konan Oral arguments in Postal Service v. Konan are scheduled for October 8. The case centers around an exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act barring lawsuits for claims arising out of the "loss" or "miscarriage" of "letters or postal matter." The justices will consider whether the exception applies to claims that arise from a USPS employee's intentional failure to deliver mail to a designated address. Bowe v. United States The Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Bowe v. United States on October 14. The case centers around procedural questions related to the application of the federal laws governing post-conviction relief for federal prisoners. Ellingburg v. United States Oral arguments in Ellingburg v. United States are scheduled for October 14. The Court will consider whether a restitution order, imposed as part of a criminal sentence, violates a clause of the Constitution barring laws that retroactively increase the punishment for a crime or criminalize conduct that was legal when it occurred. Louisiana v. Callais Louisiana v. Callais, a case challenging Louisiana's congressional map, is set for reargument on October 15. The justices first heard arguments in the redistricting case earlier this year. The Court will consider whether the map is racially gerrymandered to create majority-minority districts and whether the new districts violate the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. The case was consolidated with Robinson v. Callais. Case v. Montana The Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Case v. Montana on October 15. The justices will consider whether law enforcement can enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring. Petitioner William Trevor Case alleges that law enforcement entered his home without a warrant and seized evidence used to prosecute Case for a felony. Case's ex-girlfriend had previously called law enforcement and said Case had threatened suicide during an argument over the phone. Rico v. United States Oral arguments in Rico v. United States are scheduled for November 3. The Court will consider whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release. Petitioner Isabel Rico had her supervised release revoked by a court because she had been deemed a fugitive by a probation office in 2018. Hencely v. Fluor Corporation The Court is scheduled to hear arguments in Hencely v. Fluor Corporation on November 3. The justices will consider whether a member of the U.S. armed forces who was injured in a military base bombing can sue the government contractor who employed the bomber. Hamm v. Smith The Court will hear arguments in Hamm v. Smith on November 4. The question presented is whether and how courts should assess a claim by a defendant that he cannot be executed because he is intellectually disabled. The Alabama Department of Corrections argues that Joseph Smith is not intellectually disabled, citing multiple IQ tests where he scored higher than the level required to prove intellectual disability under the law. The Department of Corrections is asking the Court to reverse a lower court's decision overturning Smith's sentence. Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist Oral arguments in Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist are scheduled for November 4. The case asks whether a district court's final judgment must be vacated when an appeals court later determines that it erroneously dismissed a party from the case when it was transferred to federal court. Coney Island Auto Parts, Inc. v. Burton The justices will hear oral arguments in Coney Island Auto Parts, Inc. v. Burton on November 5. Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety Oral arguments in Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety are set for November 10. The Court will consider whether an inmate can file a lawsuit against a government official for violations of a federal law that protects the religious rights of prisoners, rather than the government entity that employs the official. Damon Landor, the petitioner, is a practicing Rastafarian. He alleges that he was held down by two prison guards while his head was shaved. Landor sued several officials and the Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety. A district court found that the law does not allow for damages against individual state officials. The GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal The Court is expected to hear arguments in The GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal on November 10. Fernandez v. United States The justices will hear arguments in Fernandez v. United States on November 12. The Court will consider whether "extraordinary and compelling reasons" that may justify a lower sentence can also be cited as reasons to vacate a sentence in a motion for post-conviction relief. Rutherford v. United States Oral arguments in Rutherford v. United States are scheduled for November 12. The case has been consolidated with Carter v. United States. The case also relates to "extraordinary and compelling reasons" allowing for a reduced sentence. The justices will consider whether a district court can address disparities created by the First Step Act's prospective changes in sentencing law when deciding if "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a sentencing reduction. Do you have a story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have any questions about this story? Contact LiveNews@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store