Hussain Abdul-Hussain

The fortunes of Arab Christians have been on the decline for decades. The segregation and autonomy advocated by Egypt's Copts (and some Lebanese Christians) are counterproductive, while in Lebanon neither Christian MP Michel Aoun's populism, nor Patriarch Bechara Rai's support of the Syrian regime, can stop the rot.

But the Christians have not always been as uncreative as they are now. Between the mid-19th and mid-20th centuries, Christian intellectuals argued that only secularism could grant equal rights to all Arabs, regardless of faith, thus ending 14 centuries of Muslim dominance and the treatment of Christians, and other non-Muslims, as second-class citizens.
 
But by 1920, they were divided over the creation of “Greater Lebanon.” While many saw it as their homeland, others believed that replicating the Ottoman milla, or coexistence, system, was better. It offered Muslims a partnership of sorts and lasted from 1943 until the Taif conference in 1990, when it was amended to improve the Muslim lot after the 1975-1990 civil war.
 
During this latter period a few Christian leaders toyed with other ideas, including the restoration of they called "Smaller Lebanon" and the creation of a confederacy or a federal union. Nothing came of them, and all the while the various Christian experiments failed, a financial prowess that lasted well into the 1970s also declined, and the rate of Christian emigration surged, especially after 1990.
 
Dwindling numbers meant that, given the demographic-based milla system, Christian political clout also weakened. After their last power concession at Taif, Lebanon's Christians today find themselves under pressure to further give up the 50-50 formula and settle instead for a one-third share of the state.
 
Aoun promised the Christians he would stop the decline and since 2006, with Shia militia muscle and money behind him, the former general has indeed emerged as the leader of sizeable parliamentary and ministerial blocs. But Christians, especially Aoun’s followers , should ask themselves this: After six years of Aoun's de facto leadership, have their lives improved? Has the alarming level of Christian emigration stopped or been reversed?
 
The answer on both counts is no. Aoun has offered nothing but angry rhetoric, often aimed at Lebanon's Sunnis, in particular the Hariri family, reaffirming the Christian suspicion that it was Hariri who undermined Christian superiority and it is he who should be blamed for their problems.
 
And all the while the emigration, which has taken its toll on more Christians than Muslims, continues. The choice of destination does not help. Christians prefer Western countries and Australia, where rights are protected and where they can assimilate easier, over Arab countries where, despite good money, rights and naturalization prospects are non-existent.

Christian emigration thus becomes more permanent  and has led to a decline in the community. The fewer Christians in Lebanon, the more Muslims will demand representational readjustment. The Taif Agreement is already 22 years old and looks more anachronistic by the day.
 
Lebanon's Christians stand at a crossroads. They can either continuously concede power, or they can replace coexistence with a system that gives them – and everybody else – equal rights as citizens and equal access to power, regardless of population numbers.
 
They should understand that when population numbers are not their strongest asset, they should not insist on them. They should realize that no document, or ruler, can guarantee their special status. Holding onto the obsolete French-sponsored census of 1932, and later to the National Convention arrangement in 1943, and to Taif after 1990, have all given Christians only short-lived peace of mind.
 
The same applies to betting on despots, like Syria's Bashar al-Assad, whose future is uncertain. Hanging onto Assad is a risky gamble, and Christians, like Rai, will be lucky to be spared Muslim retribution – even if political only – after the downfall of the Damascus dictator.
 
Last but not least, calling for autonomy, whether through decentralization or federalism, is as bad as clinging to coexistence or betting on Assad. Even if the idea of a Christian country proves economically viable, a Christian-only society will most likely be racist and globally rejected.
 
The solution to the Christian problem will only come through secular Arab states that ignore religious and ethnic affiliations and respect all sects and ethnicities.
 
While the idea is appealing, secular states in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Egypt cannot be created overnight, and Muslims should be convinced to relinquish their quest for the creation of Islamic or Islam-inspired states.
 
In Lebanon and Syria, Christians have the best chance of creating such states, only if Christians realize this and stop fighting for special rights that end up as privileges for their leaders and patriarchs while the average Christian packs and leaves.
 
Hussain Abdul-Hussain is the Washington Bureau Chief of the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai.