Lebanese Maronite Priest: Turkey is our number one enemy and would skin us alive if it could

Originally published on 12 January by the Middle East Media Research Institute

Lebanese Maronite priest Monsignor Camille Moubarak called for a Lebanese boycott of Turkey, which he described as “our number one enemy.” Moubarak was interviewed by Sawt Beirut International (Lebanon) Radio on January 3, 2021. He said that he would choose Iran and Saudi Arabia over Turkey, which “ruled us for 400 years, and if it were given the chance to continue to skin us alive to this day, it wouldn’t say no.” He called for a boycott of Turkish products and said that Lebanese people should not travel to Turkey. Monsignor Moubarak added that Christians in Lebanon must arm themselves again because “when someone attacks you with a gun, you must respond with a gun.”

In a November 22, 2020 interview on OTV (Lebanon) Monsignor Camille Moubarak said that a federal system should be established in Lebanon. He said that this system should be split into twelve federations – six for the Muslims and six for the Christians – and that the federal capital should be in Beirut.  Mubarak said that people would be able to choose which district they would want to live in and would simply have to respect the laws of that district. In addition, he said that such a federal regime would be different from a confederacy in that it would not establish borders between the districts, a step which he said would encourage ambitions of independence.

Monsignor Camille Moubarak said “Lebanese society does not have the shared notions necessary for a state. Every group needs to have its own notions, and these should be respected. If you agree that Lebanese society has many cultures, and many different ways of understanding the country, and that it has fundamental anthropological differences between its constituent groups, you need to rethink the governance system we have had since 1943. This system, which they called ‘consensus democracy,’ the sectarian system, the quota system, or whatever – we need to look into it again. I call for the re-examination of this regime on the basis of new concepts that would respect pluralism and unique characteristics.’’