Protests, but no revolution in Lebanon

Lebanese have in the past few years marched in demonstrations over many issues, from Syria to illegal weapons, the sectarian regime to women’s rights.

Demos in Beirut on Sunday over proposed tax hikes were the latest in a series of protests held since 2005.

Some people at such demonstrators hold revolutionary slogans — but a real revolution has yet to emerge in the country.

What is the reason for this, given the existence of many other explosive elements in Lebanon?

How did a country with a continuous political crisis, sectarian recruitment, security tensions, illegal arms, a poor social and economic situation and deteriorating living standards, succeed in avoiding the upheaval and revolution seen in several other Arab countries?

The country resists such change partly because it is so busy with its traditional divisions, and that the local political forces have sectarian immunities.

This should not, however, undermine the demonstrations nor the reasons behind them, despite the fact that some attempted to hijack the protests for their own benefit.

Yet it is clear that change will not happen in Lebanon without a confrontation with the real authority and power holders, rather than the fragile ruling facade.

Sectarianism is a major force in Lebanon. But it is not a tangible power, despite its hegemony on many aspects of our lives.

Hezbollah is today at the core of the sectarian division in Lebanon.

Is it possible for country to fight corruption given that an armed party is controlling much of its key infrastructure?

It is not only Hezbollah that is involved in corruption; many of the political forces have been corrupt and greedy at the expense of citizens.

Yet what hope is there of establishing a strong state able to dry the corruption swamps and secure decent living standards for citizens, under a sectarian armed party?

In such a scenario, the Lebanese will still be protesting for a revolution that will not happen.