From: hani@pepper.engin.umich.edu (Hani Nassif)
Subject: Re: European Parliament and the Lebanese legislative elections
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 13:59:07 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Originator: hani@pepper.engin.umich.edu


Elie Dib Wardini writes:

If I recall my elementary history classes correctly, the Ottman Empire
controlled Belad al Shaam, which consisted of "wilayat", which inturn
consisted of "sanajek".

> is this a fact? when did the Ottoman empire have a "Syrian" province?
> 
> When was Lebanon part of this provnince?
> 
> Ah bilaad al-s^aam?
> 
> Yes Damascus was a wilaaya, but the "borders" of this wilaaya changed with the
> strength of the waly and his enemies.
> 

Now belaad al sham included currently British_french_divided countries of Syria,
Lebanon and Palestine.  The main Wilayat were Damascus (the most influencial)
A'aka and the northen wilaya (I think traboulos).  Beirut, Beka'a and mountains
reported to Wali Damascus.  Saida and the south reported to Wali A'aka, while
the north reported to the northern Wilaya.
 
> The same is true for the Sanjaq of Lebanon. The Biqaa@ valley was under the
> direct control of the Baab l-@aali, since it was too important to leave in the
> control of the Waalis.
> 
I have to double check this statement.  I believe it is not true.  The reason
for me to say so, is that Lebanon was not a sinjok till about 1850s.  This is 
the time when the Ottman Empire was losing the war with Russia, and asked the 
french for weapons and help.  In return, the french forced the Ottman Empire to
give the "Maronites" in Mount Lebanon some Semi-Autonomy.  The Turkish allowed
more religious freedom for the Maronites to pray in Churches, but kept the control
over political and economical matters.  This continued till the break up of the
Ottman Empire and to 1920 when Guro (spelling?) announced "Grand Lebanon".  
In fact most of the Lebanese outside Mount Lebanon, Christans (specifically 
non-Maronites) and Muslims refused to be part of the new state and wanted to
be part of Greater Syria.  

> Syria never existed. The term Syria is a greek invention, and the term Bilaad
> al-s^aam is a borrowing from this Greek terminology.
>

Can you explain the connection here.?
 
> Yes Damascus was/is the most important city in the area. Naturally enough the
> area could be called according to it.
> 
> THis does not mean that this area actually was "part" of al-s^aam.
>

Why would Beirut and Co. report to Damascus then? 

> Note the term: al-Maghrib al-@arabi does this imply that Lybia, Algeria, and
> Tunis are part of Marocco?

Your analogy is confusing the issue.  Borders are between different peoples.
e.g. between France and Germany, between China and Russia where geographical
and natural boundaries are used (a river, a mountain, etc...). Thus they are
two independent states with different cultures and ethnic backgrounds.
EielW, have you taken a look at the North African map and the boundaries between
these countries? They are Squares and rectangles.  What kind of natural borders
are these?  it looks like someone sat down and drew lines on longitudinal and 
latitude lines, in such a way, tha you would be driving along the Tunisian-
Libyan borders and suddenly you have to make a 90 degrees turn:-)

> Occupiers and colonizers devide the areas they have occupied in administrative
> regions that best suit the interests of these occupiers. What the people in the
> region want, is another matter.

What you are implying is that so much for self declaration and independence?

> 
> So if there are Lebanese who want to unite with Syria, please say so, and
> Lebanese will have to see how to deal with the issue.
>
The unification should be the objective of all Arab states ala EC example.
It is of economic necessity if not a political one.  If some Lebanese are
objecting to unity they probably should live in GreenLand, or maybe Antartica.
By doing so they have no problem of unification with any creature...Maybe
with the Big Foot population:-) 

> 
> To those which such a union, all you need to do is state your wish rather than
> presenting old and used up arguments as if they were historical facts.
> 
> Yet you should aslo accept that there are those who do not agree with you. 
> 
Eliew...Why don't you state your objections to an Arab Unified Countries
that will share resources.  In this new world order, and while others are
uniting, we are swiming against the current.  The Arab Dictatores  will not
rule for ever.  We have wittnesed what happened in East Europe.  Hopefully,
some time in the next 21st century this will happen:-)


> The rest of your article Bassem is impecable!
> 
> elie wardini

-Hani
-- 
 ____    ____ "These views are explicitly/implicitly
|    \  /    | mine...and not that of U-M or CAEN",   
 | |\ \/ /| |  University of Michigan| Hani_Nassif@um.cc.umich.edu
 | | \  / | |  1354 G.G.Brown Lab.   | hani@caen.engin.umich.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon