__________________________________________________________
The Early Incidents: Struggle Against The
Mandate
By Dr. Edmond Melhem
The
first political event involving the SSNP and the
French authorities took place on November 16,
1935. On that date, the theretofore secret
existence of the SSNP and the identity of its
leadership were discovered by the French
authorities. It was found that the party had
several branches in Tripoli, Beirut, al-Kura,
the Biqa’, Damascus, Aleppo and in the region of
Hauran, south of Damascus. Sa’adeh and several
of his assistants were immediately arrested.
While in prison awaiting trial, Sa’adeh wrote a
statement at the request of his lawyer in which
he expounded his motives for founding the SSNP.
He wrote:
I was
an adolescent when World War I broke out, but I
had become cognizant of, and sensitive to, the
conditions of my people. As I witnessed the
woeful condition in which my people found
themselves and as I suffered the misery rampant
among them, the first question that came to my
mind was: What was it that brought all this woe
on my people?...[1]
Sa’adeh
added:
After
the end of the war I began looking for the
answer to this question and for the solution to
the chronic political problems that kept pushing
my people into one adversity after another...
Obviously, I was not seeking an answer to this
question for the [mere] purpose of satisfying a
scientific or intellectual curiosity, but rather
to discover the most effective means to
eliminate the causes of this woe. After an
organized preliminary study I came to the
conclusion that the absence of national
sovereignty was the primary cause of what had
befallen and what continued to ail my nation.[2]
At his
trial on January 23, 1936, the charges relating
to Sa’adeh’s arrest were summed up by a French
prosecutor as follows:
1) the
establishment of a secret association;
2)
conspiring against the Lebanese state and the
integrity of Lebanese territories;
3)
attempting to change the form of the [Lebanese]
government;
4)
preventing the Lebanese from exercising their
civil and political rights;
5)
creating an atmosphere of turmoil and disorder.
Sa’adeh
transformed his trial into a moral and political
confrontation with the French. When the
prosecutor, John Rossa, called out in court his
name in court as "Antoine" Sa’adeh, he gave no
answer. Asked by an interpreter about the reason
for his silence, he replied that he had not
heard his name: Antun. The prosecutor then had
to substitute "Antun" for the Gallicized
"Antoine."
Another
daring stand by Sa’adeh at his trial was his
refusal to speak in French. He was asked by the
prosecutor to communicate with members of the
jury in French, since he was fluent in this
language and would be understood by everyone.
But Sa’adeh insisted on speaking in Arabic,
saying:
I am
Syrian and in my country. I lead a liberation
movement, the aim of which is to establish
national sovereignty. Therefore, I cannot accept
to be forced to speak in my country in a
language other than my national language.[3]
Hence,
from the very start, Sa’adeh projected his
forceful personality and imposed his way of
thinking on the procedures of his trial.[4]
In insisting on being called by his Arabic name,
he not only made a powerful personal statement,
but defended the national identity of his
people. When charged with conspiracy against the
Lebanese state, he retorted that it was the
French themselves who were the conspirators,
since they had partitioned Syria according to
the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Moreover, Sa’adeh was
also accused of violating the geographical
integrity and territorial unity of
Lebanon. Enraged by this charge, he launched a
furious counter-attack, accusing both the
British and French of being guilty of the very
violation of which he was accused. As he put it:
The
violation of the geographical integrity of our
land had already been achieved in San Remo,
Sevres and Lausanne.[5]
Sa’adeh
denied that his party was plotting against the
internal security of the Lebanese state. He
argued that since its establishment in 1932, the
party had never been involved in any
disturbances or disorderly behaviour.[6]
He added that although it was necessary and
indeed one of his party’s responsibilities to
change the form of government, the party had
made no decision or taken any action on this
issue.[7]
Sa’adeh
justified the existence of his party on the
grounds that it was a movement concerned with
"the rejuvenation of a nation that the world had
pronounced dead."[8]
Hence, a main objective of this movement, he
argued, was to awaken the people to their true
national identity. It may be suggested here that
the role of this movement was to provide a
"short-cut" to nationhood for a people unable to
reach that goal without active intervention.
Moreover, Sa’adeh sarcastically argued that this
national endeavour should be considered
complementary to the mission of the Mandate
authorities, if the latter were truly
interested in preparing the people for
self-government and maturity. As he put it:
We are
carrying out our duty and assisting the
mandatory authorities in their task...[9]
The
trial of Antun Sa’adeh and other officials of
his party can be considered the SSNP's first
test the result being a relative success for the
party. Roughly speaking, this test seemed like a
political battle involving, on the one hand, a
newly developing national movement concerned
with the renewal and rejuvenation of the social
and political life of geographical Syria, and on
the other hand, the French authorities who
controlled present-day Syria and Lebanon.
Sa’adeh’s movement had not long been established
when it was discovered; the spread of its ideas
and activities among the population was limited
due to its secrecy; and its membership was
small. Nevertheless, this movement emerged from
its first political test as a far more assertive
and much stronger national movement. Sa’adeh’s
daring stand in court generated considerable
publicity[10]
and earned him grass-roots support and respect
from both within and without his party,[11]
but cost him, at the same time, a six-month term
in prison.[12]
The
hostility between Sa’adeh and the official
authorities continued following his first
imprisonment. As mentioned in the introductory
chapter, one month after his release in May
1936, Sa’adeh was re-arrested while on his way
to Damascus and sentenced to a further six-
month prison term.[13]
On
February 20, 1937, the Lebanese authorities
tried first to prevent and then disband a
celebration by the SSNP in the town of
Bikfayyah.[14]
Violent clashes ensued and led to the
encirclement of the Lebanese security forces by
the SSNP members participating in the
celebration.[15]
In the wake of the bloody clashes, Sa’adeh
issued a communiqué in which he attacked the
government and the ruling sectarian class. He
argued that the Social Nationalists are not
strangers in Lebanon, but members of the
Lebanese state with the right to express their
opinions in regard to its destiny. Sa’adeh then
warned:
If
Lebanon has an entity, then it is the entity of
the Lebanese people as a whole, unless the
ruling class in Lebanon regards itself as
Lebanon and the Lebanese people as nothing but
the ruled community; [if this be the case,] then
we have the honour to declare that one of the
most important goals of the SSNP is to eliminate
this unhealthy image of our national life- the
image of the ruler and the ruled - and to put an
end to civil privileges in the state.[16]
The
Lebanese government reacted angrily to Sa’adeh’s
communiqué. According to observers, “a vast and
well-organized campaign of persecution against
the party” ensued.[17]
This was accompanied by an attempt to arrest
Sa’adeh. On March 9, 1937, the authorities
succeeded in arresting him for the third time.
He was kept in prison for two months, during
which time he was tried but proved innocent.
While in prison, Sa’adeh wrote Nushu’ al-Ummah
al-Suriyyah (The Genesis of the Syrian
Nation), but the French authorities confiscated
the manuscript and never returned it.[18]
It should be noted in this context that
following Sa’adeh’s arrest, hundreds of SSNP
youths in Tripoli and al-Kura petitioned the
Lebanese President, protesting the government’s
restrictions on freedoms and appealing to him
for Sa’adeh’s release. In response to the tone
used in their petition, the government accused
those who had signed it of conspiracy against
general order and of contempt of government.
They were subjected to two trials and each fined
a certain amount.[19]
Following his third release, Sa’adeh devoted his
time to leading the party on a course of public
involvement in national and social issues. He
and his party addressed themselves to national
issues that concerned not only the Lebanese
people, but citizens of the entire Fertile
Crescent as well. The Zionist settlements in
Palestine, the Turkish-Syrian dispute over
Alexandretta and national sovereignty were among
the issues addressed.
As far
as the question of national sovereignty was
concerned, Sa’adeh opposed the negotiations into
which the French government had entered in 1936
with the separate governments of Beirut and
Damascus. The aim of the negotiations was to
sign separate treaties providing local autonomy
while maintaining important ties between France
and the two states.
Sa’adeh
presented a memorandum to the governments of
Beirut and Damascus in which he warned against
the danger of entering into negotiations with
France and signing separate treaties.[20]
Instead, he suggested that the two governments
determine their common interests and enterprises
and consolidate their economic and political
ties. He also proposed that the two countries
establish a unified administration that would
run and control their determined common
interests and enterprises. According to him, the
treaties with France would not establish total
and unequivocal national sovereignty. He
regarded them as a stratagem employed by the
Mandatory power to maintain its grip on Syrian
affairs.[21]
At this time, Sa'adeh also petitioned the High
Commissioner for a Syro-Lebanese union.
During
the same period, Sa’adeh engaged in
confrontation with the Mandate authorities
concerning the question of Alexandretta. The
Turkish Republic was claiming rights to this
Syrian district and to the city of Antakya
(Antioch) and was exerting pressure on France to
cede the territory. Sa’adeh publicly denounced
the complicity of the Mandate and appealed to
the League of Nations, to the French government
and to the various Syrian governments to protect
Alexandretta. He even proposed to enroll the
entire membership of his party in a national
army in order to defend this northern part of
Syria. Neither his warnings and appeals nor his
calls and proposals for action were heard.
Eventually, the sanjak of Alexandretta
was annexed by Turkey in 1939 after a
Franco-Turkish settlement was reached enabling
France to "maintain and even to strengthen and
extend her relations with Turkey, the 'Guardian
of the Straits' since 1936..."[22]
Towards
the end of 1938 and after renewed repression of
the SSNP by the authorities, Sa’adeh left
Lebanon on a trip to Europe and the Americas to
advance the cause of the SSNP among Syrian
emigrants and to gather financial support.
[1]
Antun Sa'adeh, al-Muhadarat al-'Ashr (The Ten
Lectures), Beirut: SSNP, 1976, pp. 47-48
[2]
Ibid., pp. 8-9.
[3]
SSNP, al-Thaqafah , No. 4, November
1981, p. 20.
[4]Nadim K. Makdisi reported that “to most
people who met him, friend and foe alike, the
impression which Antun Sa’adeh left was that of
a man of unusually strong character and a
striking personality. He possessed a great deal
of will power and was extremely intelligent...”.
See his dissertation, “The Syrian National
Party: A Case Study of the First Inroads of
National Socialism in the Arab World,” Unpub.
PhD. Diss., American University of Beirut, 1960,
p. 15.
[5]Ina’am Ra’ad, “Tarikh al-Hizb” (The History
of the Party), al-Thaqafah , No. 4,
November 1981, p. 43.
[6]SSNP, al-Thaqafah , No. 4, November
1981, p. 26.
[7]Ibid., p. 22
[8]Antun Sa’adeh, al-Muhadarat al-’Ashr
(The Ten Lectures), op. cit., p. 30.
[9]SSNP, al-Thaqafah , No. 4, November
1981, p. 25.
[10]Nadim K. Makdisi, op. cit., p. 22.
[11]Sethian asserted that following its trial,
the SSNP "kept growing stronger and its
membership increased." He added, "merchants,
workers, craftsmen were equally eager to hear
about a solution to the plight of their
country." See Robert Dasho Sethian, "The Syrian
National Party," Unpub. PhD. Diss. University of
Michigan, 1946, pp. 11-12. For his part, Makdisi
contended that after the proclamation of the
SSNP to the public, "many thousands applied for
membership and thousands were accepted." See
Makdisi, op. cit., p. 22.
[12]It
was reported by Robert Dasho Sethian that "the
charge of secrecy was the only one pressed
against the Syrian National Party: members were
released and Mr. Sa’adeh alone was sentenced to
six months' imprisonment." See Sethian, op.
cit., p. 9.
[13]Some party members, led by ‘Abdullah
al-Jumayyil, physically clashed with the editor
of al-Masa’ newspaper, Aref
al-Ghrayyeb, and the editor of al-Rabitah
al-Sharqiyyah, Ibrahim Haddad. The two
newspapers continued publishing reports in which
Sa’adeh was dubbed a "fascist agent," despite
the absence of any connection between his party
and the Axis powers, a fact established at his
earlier trial. The clash with the two editors
took place after their refusal to publish the
SSNP’s denial and refutation of the accusations.
Sa’adeh was held responsible for this incident
and was accordingly arrested. For more details
on this incident, see John Dayyah, Sa’adeh wa
al-Naziyyah (Sa’adeh and Nazism), Beirut:
Fajr an-Nahda, 1994, pp. 25-28.
[14]This celebration was the first general
gathering organized by the SSNP and attended by
Sa’adeh. Although the SSNP branch was weak in
Bikfayyah, which was recognized as a centre for
the government and the pro-French Maronite
political parties, the leader of the SSNP
insisted that this celebration take place in
this town. See Jubran Jurayj, Min al-Ju’bah
(From the Case History), Vol. III, Beirut:
SSNP, 1988, pp. 162-163.
[15]Violent clashes erupted when the Lebanese
security forces, led by the local governor
(Qa’immaqam) Fu’ad al-Baryyidi, attempted to
seize the flags raised in the rally and disperse
the participants. SSNP members disobeyed orders
to quit the place, telling al-Baryyidi that they
would only discontinue the rally by orders from
their leader. See ibid., p. 159.
[16]Antun Sa’adeh, Mukhtarat fi al-Mas’alah
al-Lubnaniyyah - 1936-1943, vol. I (Selected
Writings on the Lebanese Question), Beirut:
SSNP, 1976, p. 43.
[17]Labib Z. Yamak, The Syrian Social
Nationalist Party: An Ideological Analysis,
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
1969, p. 58.
[18]Haytham A. Kader, The Syrian Social
Nationalist Party: Its Ideology and Early
History, Beirut: Haytham A. Kader, p.113.
[19]The first trial took place in Tripoli on 23
November, 1937. The second started on 18
December, 1937 and concluded on 12 April, 1938.
For details see Jubran Jurayj, Min al-Ju’bah
(From the Case History), vol. IV, Beirut: SSNP, 1993,
pp. 187-192.
[20]The affair of the treaties received
extensive coverage in SSNP publications. See
Antun Sa’adeh, al-’Athar al-Kamilah
(Complete Works) vol. II, pp. 215-220; vol. III,
pp. 123-124, pp. 210-211, pp. 224-228; vol. IV,
pp. 79-80; Antun Sa’adeh, Mukhtarat fi al-Mas’alah
al-Lubnaniyyah - (1936-1943), op. cit., pp.
33-40.
[21]Antun Sa’adeh, Mukhtarat fi al-Mas’alah
al-Lubnaniyyah (1936-1943) , op. cit., pp.
33-40.
[22]Arnold Toynbee, “The Hatay (Autonomous
Sanjak of Alexandretta),” Documents on
International Affairs, 1937, p. 471.
