Memorials and Martyrs in Modern Lebanon

SIX Memorial Politics and National Imaginings: Possibilities and Limits

memory politics and national imaginings 189 Memorial Politics and National Imaginings Possibilities and Limits The preceding chapters presented historical and contemporary evidence of the efforts of various political and cultural elites in Lebanon to conduct a politics of memory that produces national solidarity after times of violence . My argument began with the assertion that Muslims and Christians share the symbol of martyrdom, as martyrs are central to both faiths. In the particular commemorative narratives I investigated, martyrs became national symbols because they did not give up their ethno-religious affiliation ; instead, they died and were commemorated as members of their communities who gave the ultimate sacrifice together with members from others. Rather than executing a hegemonic national project—one that sought to impose a homogeneous identity based on shared (secular ) beliefs, practices, and symbols—members of different ethno-religious elites throughout Lebanon’s history exercised their “power of ‘world-making ’” using their own community’s symbolism and vocabulary in order to accommodate religious difference. The resulting images and narratives in memorials and cemeteries that honor Lebanese coexistence look quite different , but they all define the national community as a shared Muslim and Christian project. As such, these commemorative Lebanese projects do not easily fit under the standard definition of an imagined national community promoted by Benedict Anderson: “a deep horizontal comradeship” in which members have left behind their religious or ethnic identifications and thereby managed to suppress or exclude difference.1 Rather, Lebanon’s politics of memory fits under the recently suggested category of “quasi-nationalism,” six 189 b 190 memorials and martyrs in modern lebanon a term coined by political scientist Lisa Wedeen who sought to explain how a weak state like the unified Republic of Yemen generates national attachments. Her research led her to conclude that national attachments “occur episodically, are often transmitted diffusely, and congeal suddenly, only to dissolve once again.”2 My research of public memorials in Lebanon would support that thesis. The public memorials that were built to last rarely did, and the public gatherings that were staged against the backdrop of the memorials eventually ceased. However, new memorials emerged as old ones weathered, and new commemorative displays and rituals kept alive the core trope of shared Muslim and Christian sacrifice, in different forms and different locales. With my findings I challenge the conventional understanding of “sectarian” identities as inherently antagonistic and conflict -generating, and therefore that such identities are “problems” needing resolution through modernization or deconstruction. Moreover, I place the symbolic significance of martyrdom—a term that presently evokes the image of virgin-and-paradise-loving suicide bombers and assorted acts of fanaticism—in historical context in order to show the ways in which martyrdom has long been part of secular-political projects. Acts of mournful and heroic national sacrifice have been at the core of Lebanon’s nation-making enterprise, because they bridged ethno-religious divides while allowing religious beliefs and practices to coexist within a secular, nationalist framework. None of the martyrs that became national symbols in Lebanon died on a suicide mission.3 Instead, they were civilians who were rounded up, tried, and executed, or shot or bombed in military operations in which they did not participate as armed combatants. The only armed fighters on display were idealized Arab peasants who rose up in revolt against injustice and oppression. Civilian deaths constitute the single largest casualty category in Lebanon’s many wars. Their loss of life was given meaning through stories that emphasized defiance against the odds, suffering, and sacrifice, and therefore made them—rather than soldiers— model citizens. Lebanese soldiers are also honored as “martyr-heroes,” yet the specific history of the Lebanese army prevented it from becoming a vehicle for and symbol of national integration. In contrast, when civilians faced death together, regardless or despite of their ethno-religious differences , bonds of solidarity were created that unified the living to different degrees and for different lengths of time. My research cannot answer the question of whether the politicians or the persons attending the ceremonies of remembrance sincerely believed that Lebanon was a nation where Muslims and Christians were equals or shared equally in power, politics, or sacrifice. Indeed, it is quite unlikely memory politics and national imaginings 191 that they did. However, many of them probably shared sentiments of sincere grief over the loss of Lebanese lives or anger at the way the deaths had occurred or...