We grew up in the shadow of a fault line, to the blare of the Arab-Israeli conflict. We would hear about the central cause, whenever the ruler gave a speech, whenever the government attempted to justify its failures and whenever a political party attempted to cover its reneging on its promises. The state television often bombarded us with interjections on the central cause, and the state radio drank from the same spring, while the official papers compiled lengthy articles on the cause. When a citizen asked about the hard-to-find bread, they would accuse him of compromising on the central cause and seeking to undermine priorities. If he asked about vote-rigging, they would accuse him of weakening the morale of the nation. And if he said that democracy is not incompatible with affirmative action for the central cause, they would dump him in a prison or send him on a journey of which there would be no return. In the name of the central cause, many coups that styled themselves as revolutions took place. Rules established themselves and engaged in tyranny, inventing a party and forcing the people to pledge to them their allegiance. The money meant for development was spent on armies that often came back defeated from the battles of the cause. The integrity of the cause was placed in the hands of the intelligence services. Instead of developing the infrastructure, torture techniques were developed. Anyone who did not applaud with alacrity was called a traitor, and so was anyone who marshaled but half a smile or who asked about the leader's age, the time when his term ends, and what he did in the fields of development, education, health or freedoms. For the only criterion is the honorable position on the cause. Every criticism must therefore be the work of foreign hands, and every objection hides behind it foreign agendas plotting to pounce on the homeland and attempting to punish it for its unwavering stance on the central cause. In the process of hiding behind the central cause, many regimes were covering up the problems of their countries, as though denying the existence of a disease is enough to treat it. But in the absence of the concept of citizenship and basic rights, suppressed diseases became ever more malignant and aggressive. Fear from the others who have questionable loyalties only helped entrench policies of marginalization and coercion. We thus paid a lofty price for hiding behind the cause and then discovered that it was not truly a cause for those who ruled and hogged power in its name. We grew up in the shadow of the old fault line. And unfortunately, here we are now, witnessing the birth of a new fault line that runs through our communities and states, threatening their stability and unity. Without beating around the bush, I am speaking of the Shia-Sunni fault line which now dictates the movements of a number of states. Innocently, or naively, we wanted to believe that Sunni-Shia strife in Iraq is just a lie invented by the occupation and one that will come to an end with its withdrawal. We were deluded into believing that the ballot boxes would solve the problem. But we then discovered that most of the voting took place along sectarian lines, as though the elections were but a chapter of the civil war, fought through the polls. The occupation has left, but strife has remained. And it is in strife's nature to export the fire and draw in the neighbors to its theater. This doesn't need a long explanation. For instance, al-Maliki is annoyed by a statement by Erdogan, which he takes as a flagrant meddling, but he is not annoyed by Iranian tutelage over the small details of Iraqi daily life. The fabric of Iraq has been torn, and Mesopotamia has taken its place along the new fault line. Meanwhile, the grave crisis in Syria becomes ever more sinister because of its position along this new fault line. It is enough to watch how the Iraqis are divided with respect to the Syrian crisis, as it is quintessentially along sectarian lines. It is enough to see how the Lebanese are divided over the Syrian issue. I don't mean to say here that what is happening in Syria is merely a sectarian conflict. But one must admit that the crisis developed quick ties with the new fault line, and Lebanon is not far from it, but rather has reserved its own seat along it. Just like Sunni Iraqis ask about their position in the new Iraq, the Sunni Lebanese are asking about their position in a country where Hezbollah has become the strongest player in forging its present and perhaps even its future. Meanwhile, the crisis in Bahrain itself is linked to this new fault line. One can hear in many capitals that Iran's success in becoming a political and religious reference point for many Shiite Arabs threatens to drag many countries into the new fault line. The old fault line lay along the Arab-Israeli frontlines. The new fault line is located within capitals and neighborhoods, and it threatens to strike stability, unity and engender a long devastating strife. The countries concerned must engage in deep reflection over the best way to deal with this, especially if Iran chooses to push forward with its brinkmanship, towards a point of no return.
