Students elect representatives

Violence, unfamiliar alliances characterize the annual student democratic practice

BEIRUT - Samer Mazloum

December 2003

Similar to its uniqueness in organizing labor protests, Lebanon also enjoys relative freedom when it comes to student elections.

But while student supporters of wartime militias control the different branches of the state-run Lebanese University according to the geographic location of respective branches, private universities in Lebanon enjoy greater freedom and a more “democratic” process of student elections.

This year, however, private universities witnessed a swing in mood in favor of pro-government parties, most of which muster support along sectarian lines.

At the Lebanese American University (LAU) Beirut, the traditionally influential Progressive Youth Organization (PYO) proposed the formation of a broad leftist front whose membership should include, in addition to PYO, the People’s Movement and the independent leftist Pablo Neruda group.

The alliance was born dead, however, in light of the People’s Movement’s staunch opposition and Pablo Neruda’s uncompromising position on the distribution of quota in LAU Beirut’s 10-seat Student Council.

Leftist disagreements resulted in a severe defeat in which the PYO saw its representation shrinking to a single seat as a Shiite alliance between the Amal Movement, Hizbullah and a so-called Gathering of Bekaa Youth swept eight seats.

The leftist failure in LAU was hardly avoided at the American University of Beirut (AUB), where Pablo Neruda’s sister group, No Frontiers, and their ally, the People’s Movement, saved face as they won more than half of the seats in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS).

The leftist alliance could not stop, however, a right-wing cocktail alliance between the secular Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP), Shiite Amal and Hizbullah, from winning a few seats in FAS. The SSNP particularly succeeded in scoring good results in AUB’s Suleiman Olayan School of Business, as it divided its seats with former Army Commander General Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM).

Meanwhile, the FPM lost grounds in its traditional “castle” in the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture in favor of several other candidates supported by different political groups.

But the minor success of rightist groups came to an end with the surprise breakthrough of the PYO in AUB, which scored alone a victory of more than 17 seats.

PYO is expected to join No Frontiers and the People’s Movement to form the Leftist Front, which if formed, would increase the leftists’ chances in combating an encroaching rightist and sectarian influence on AUB campus.

At the Notre Dam University (NDU) as well as in LAU Jbeil, sectarian sentiments were at their peak with supporters of the disbanded Lebanese Forces (LF), but the FPM still swept 19 out of the 21 seats in NDU. But in LAU Jbeil, the LF won 8 seats.

No clear reasons stand behind the loss of the FPM, but the dominance of the LF in LAU Jbeil campus will certainly jeopardize secular efforts and attempts to open dialogue between students from both Muslim and Christian areas who, despite the end of civil war 13 years ago, are still divided along wartime sectarian lines.

Another disturbing element came to the fore during the 2003 student elections in private universities namely a surge in violence. In NDU, the newly appearing phenomenon was most felt with a clash between LF and FPM supporters resulting in the hospitalization of some students.

In LAU, FPM supporters reported assaults on their cars and physical threats against them. In LAU, Pablo Neruda activists also reported threats. Violence also reached AUB, which is historically known for its peaceful elections despite the diverse number of political parties.

The SSNP and the People’s Movement clashed more than once while the administration’s attempts to calm down the situation were hardly successfully.

One student activist suggested that student political groups should establish “a security committee” that should make sure to eliminate physical tension between parties in the same manner combatant militias dealt with inter-areas security affairs during the civil war.

“Political parties meet regularly to discuss national and student issues and there is no reason why they should not meet to put an end to possible physical clashes,” the activist said.