Days of the Union - The First Year - Part 5: The Dismissal of General Afif al-Bizri and the Vice Presidents' New Powers

Friday, 21 March: The Dismissal of General Afif al-Bizri

We were taken by surprise today by an event we had not expected: the dismissal, or resignation, of General Afif al-Bizri, commander of the First Army.

Afif is a senior and well-known officer, though accused of communism. He had been appointed, before the Union, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, at a time when the politicized officers effectively steered policy from behind the facade of the "National Gathering," which was "led" by Khalid al-Azm (the Red Millionaire) after he had adopted socialist principles (in those days the surest rope for anyone wishing to rise on the political stage), along with Sabri al-Asali, Maamun al-Kuzbari, Daham al-Hadi, chief of the Shammar tribe, Abdul Aziz al-Musallat, chief of the Jabour tribe, and Akram al-Hourani and Salah al-Din al-Bitar, the only two genuinely sincere men in this strange arrangement, and it was they, the first of them especially, whose word was final and decisive.

I heard later from Field Marshal Amer that the General had drawn up a list of officer transfers, assigning sensitive posts to officers accused of communism. The Field Marshal's attention was drawn to the dangers that might follow from these transfers, and he refused to approve them, at which al-Bizri, the very man who proclaimed and broadcast that he had been at the forefront of the sacred march toward union, flew into a rage and threatened to resign.

He got what he "wanted": the following morning, the President of the Republic issued a decision, announced over the radio, transferring him to serve as an advisor on planning affairs, and General Jamal al-Faisal was appointed in his place, a man known for his military discipline, his distance from political activity, and his obedience to orders without question. I came to know him afterward, and had occasion to respect his military competence and his acute sense of military duty.

Ahmad Abdel Karim wrote of this resignation[1] that General al-Bizri had resigned because Field Marshal Amer had refused to approve the appointment of the officer Ahmad al-Hunaidi as commander of the armored corps.

The author adds: the Field Marshal summoned me and asked me to persuade al-Bizri to abandon his resignation and accept an important post, that of planning. I met with him and persuaded him to remain in his new post, and he agreed after some hesitation. I informed the Field Marshal that the mediation had succeeded. The Field Marshal said the President would summon him, and he waited a week without anyone summoning him, so he left Cairo for Damascus.

General al-Bizri had been one of my old companions from secondary school in Aleppo, though I was a year ahead of him. His father had been appointed a judge in our city, and Afif and his brothers and I grew up together in its neighborhoods. We later met again on the political stage, he a politicized officer, I a deputy. I can attest that he was, without doubt, a competent officer, clean in his dealings, and I knew his modest home and his humble furnishings and his austere way of life, so much so that in his final years he came to live off his writings for a few magazines, after the purchasing power of the Syrian lira had collapsed to rock bottom, and his pension no longer sufficed him for more than a few days of the month.

Yet he was violent in his conduct, and this violence showed itself when he presided over the military court in 1957, trying the politicians accused of conspiring to overthrow the rule of the "National Gathering." His court handed down sentences of execution and hard labor for life against them, sentences that were extremely harsh and not grounded in sound legal rules, since the accused had been convicted merely on suspicion. Fortunately, the death sentences were never carried out, as some men in power had wished, because President Gamal Abdel Nasser, before the Union had even come about, intervened with his "friends" among the men in power and succeeded in having these ill-omened death sentences commuted.

He was then seized by a black hatred of Abdel Nasser, and wrote a book attacking him fiercely, going so far as to accuse him of being an "agent of colonialism."[2]

Even so, he used to visit me on holidays, and would seize, indeed manufacture, every opportunity to disparage Abdel Nasser, who had once praised him by saying:

"We hold three things sacred: God, the homeland, and the President."

On my last visit to his home, which fell on the third day of Shawwal 1410 AH (26 April 1990), he admitted the mistake he had made in abandoning his work with the Union, though by then it was too late, for the Union had become a distant and painful memory, and Abdel Nasser was already with his Lord, who rewards the virtuous for their virtue and the wrongdoer for his wrong.

I recall that Afif confided to me, on this same visit, that the Baathists had been at odds with al-Hourani, to such a degree that Salah al-Din al-Bitar once whispered in his ear, while they were gathered in the Defense Council, commenting on something al-Hourani had said:

"Listen to what this spy is saying."

We had long known of these "family" quarrels, which Abdel Nasser himself later confirmed during the tripartite union talks between Egypt, Iraq, and Syria in 1963, talks that came to no result, as we had expected. He told the negotiating delegations, the Syrian delegation among them, headed by al-Bitar himself, that al-Bitar and al-Hourani had each been slandering the other, and stabbing at him in the most disgraceful manner.[3]

The two of them ended up, in the end, each taking a different path: one (al-Hourani) followed an openly secessionist course, while the other outwardly upheld union while inwardly favoring secession.

Saturday, 29 March

On this date the President issued a decision defining the responsibilities of his three vice presidents.

Mr. Abdel Latif Boghdadi (Egyptian) was given responsibility for:

"Overseeing the drafting and coordination of general policy in the United Arab Republic in economic and executive affairs, and monitoring its implementation once approved."

Mr. Akram al-Hourani was given responsibility "for social affairs and public services."

Mr. Sabri al-Asali was given responsibility "for the affairs of the union between the two regions."

I had sent to the Presidential Palace a number of decrees for the President's ratification (or rejection), or that of any official he delegated, but they had not been returned, neither signed nor unsigned.

Their authors are still waiting, and today the responsibilities were distributed.

But what does it mean, in practice, for al-Asali to hold responsibility for the affairs of union between the two regions?

Mr. al-Hourani asked me that any contact I had with Mr. al-Asali should be limited to matters of the Ministry of Justice.

I learned today from a friend that Nazim al-Qudsi was unhappy at my having entered the government while he had been excluded. If this is true, it is a strange thing to hold against me, for the parties were dissolved by their own decisions, followed by the issuance of a republican decree dissolving them officially.

One wonders: has Halima gone back to her old habits? (an old Arabic saying about someone reverting to a familiar bad habit).

Rushdi al-Kikhya arrived in Damascus, and took his usual room at the hotel he always stayed in, the Orient Palace (facing the Hejaz railway station), but I thought it best to delay visiting him until the nature of relations among the members of a now-dissolved party became clearer.

Sunday, 30 March

Today "Algeria Day" was inaugurated across Asia and Africa, and "Algeria Week" was likewise inaugurated in the Arab Republic.

His Excellency Shukri al-Quwatli presided over the official gathering at the Syrian University (Damascus University), with the two vice presidents and the ministers beside him.

We donated a month's salary.

Abdul Hamid al-Sarraj put up for auction the very pen with which King Saud's checks had been signed over to the state, and we paid an additional sum in this auction.

In all honesty, the enthusiasm of those present for Algeria and its cause defied description.

It is France's own misfortune that it makes an enemy of the Arabs and Muslims, insisting on the shedding of blood to deny a people the freedom that is their natural right, casting aside the 1948 United Nations Charter, whose first article states that:

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."

France's claim that Algeria is French soil has no foundation whatsoever, neither in history, nor in ethnicity, nor in language, nor in religion.

It drew attention that the Arab Baath Party had begun to reappear, taking on a form reminiscent of certain party structures, despite the dissolution of the political parties.

Tuesday, 1 April

I visited Mr. Abdel Latif Boghdadi at the Guest Palace. He was fasting for Ramadan, with the Quran beside him. I too was fasting.

We spoke at length about affairs of state, and I was impressed by his composure, his calm, and the soundness of his outlook on handling citizens' concerns.

I noticed that, despite his dignified appearance, he loved a good joke and told one with relish.

He told me the story of the peasant from Upper Egypt who bought a watch from Cairo University, hoping it would make him rich. He did indeed become one, only to find he had nothing left to bring back to his own village.

He asked me to travel to Cairo to take part in unifying the laws of the two regions. I asked his leave to postpone this until after Ramadan, so that I might travel with a number of specialists, judges and professors from the Faculty of Law.

This was an idea bound to win the interest of any Minister of Justice, standing as I did before two different bodies of legislation, when the two peoples needed, of necessity, to be governed by unified laws, so that every citizen would know his rights and obligations in his dealings with his fellow citizens. Should I say that I had come to notice certain differences between our own officers and Egypt's, in matters of culture and good conduct?

Sunday, 6 April

Today the President issued two decisions delegating to his vice president Akram al-Hourani certain financial powers, as well as "the exercise of the President of the Republic's powers in issuing decisions ratifying contracts retaining lawyers on behalf of the ministries."

At that time, no government litigation department had yet been established, and some ministries, the Ministry of Finance especially, made use of the expertise of certain lawyers.

These two decisions were followed by a third, issued on 15 April, delegating to al-Hourani "the exercise of the powers of the Chairman of the Syrian Council of Ministers in matters relating to the State Inspection Office, the Bureau of Accounts, and the Disciplinary Council."

The names of these departments and their affiliations changed later, and some of their provisions were amended. It is clear that the President's reliance in matters of government was increasingly directed toward al-Hourani.

7 April

The wheels of state keep turning: today the President issued a decision, No. 12 of 1958, concerning the national flag that would replace the two former flags of the Syrian and Egyptian states.

This decision provided that the national flag of the United Arab Republic would be composed of three colors, black, white, and red, bearing two five-pointed stars, colored green. The decision also specified the flag's width in proportion to its length, and the placement of its colors.

And with God's favor and blessing, O first of the free Arab republics.

Thursday, 8 May

The situation in Lebanon is giving warning of severe internal danger.

President Camille Chamoun, once a leading figure of Arab nationalism, has turned his back on his own past, and has grown ever harsher in his hostility toward the Lebanese parties and organizations opposed to him because of his vehement attacks on the United Arab Republic, as though he wished to show himself openly acting "as a Christian confronting Muslims."

He knows full well that whatever lies behind this stance has long been overtaken by time, ever since the ages of ignorance receded from our lands.

Let no one be unaware that the heavenly religions, in Lebanon especially, have coexisted in the best possible way. Its Muslims agreed that the head of their state should always be a Maronite, even though Christians there are a minority. Riad al-Solh, the Sunni Muslim leader, accepted this solution without ever having it written into any constitution or law, so that the Christians might feel secure in their existence and their interests. To reassure the Christians further, the Muslims also agreed that the commander of the army should be a Maronite, a post now held by General Fouad Chehab.

It is regrettable that President Chamoun has resorted to odious sectarianism, to win the sympathy of Christian Europe, so that it might rush to his aid in hours of danger. He was the only one among the Arab presidents who declared his adherence to the odious Baghdad Pact in 1957, and in 1958 he concluded a treaty of friendship and cooperation with the United States of America.

Many Lebanese Christian leaders recognized the full danger of Chamoun's policy, and stood against him in opposition. To frighten them off, he resorted to the language of threats.

The wheels of sedition began to turn, and some fanatics went so far today as to assassinate the Maronite Christian journalist Nassib al-Matni, who had become a source of great annoyance to Chamoun. He had been editor-in-chief of the Beirut newspaper al-Telegraph.

His assassination had a great echo across every radio station in the world and in the Arab press.

Prime Minister Saeb Salam resigned.

The horns of evil began to stir in the towns and highlands of Lebanon.

Friday, 23rd

Dr. Charles Malik, Lebanon's Foreign Minister, known for his blind bias against Arab nationalism, submitted a complaint to the United Nations Security Council against the United Arab Republic "for its interference in Lebanon's internal affairs."

This complaint was condemned by Lebanon's Christian leaders, the Maronite Patriarch above all, who conveyed his condemnation to the ambassadors of the great powers accredited to Lebanon, joined in this by Henri Pharaon, Charles Helou, Edmond Rabbath, and Ghassan Tueni. The Druze leader Kamal Jumblatt warned him of an internal sectarian strife of which he himself would be the first victim.

But Chamoun and Malik remained stubbornly set in their ways. Anthony Nutting "did them justice"[4] when he wrote of them: "They were candid in their view of Arab unity, that it would be an Islamic empire in which the Christian communities would not be well treated, and that they wished to protect Lebanon from the global Arab tendency and from international communism."

The Security Council considered Lebanon's complaint on 27 May, and decided to postpone its consideration until the Council of the Arab League had first taken it up.

The Soviet Union issued a statement saying:

"The United States and Britain are working to interfere in Lebanon's internal affairs, and a serious warning is being addressed to them, to cease this unjust interference."

The Soviet Union realized that supporting sectarian rule in Lebanon carried, without needing to say so openly, a veiled threat to the neighboring Republic, especially since relations between the Republic and Lebanon were extremely tense.

---

Endnotes:

[1] Ahmad Abdel Karim, Lights on the Union, p. 165 and 211.

[2] The title of this book is "Nasserism as Part of Modern Colonialism," Damascus, Dar al-Sharq, 1962, meaning that this book appeared in the full swing of the secessionist wave. In his final years, he returned to reading Sufi studies and wrote a fine book on Jihad in Islam.

[3] See Adel Zaabub, The Arab Charter, p. 52.

[4] In his book "Nasser," Cairo, 1985, p. 271.