Gebran Tueni is still alive when I play back this interview on my digital recorder. His hurried, yet candid speech still echoes with a unique enthusiasm; a zeal for straightforwardness—even in the face of certain danger—that is almost nonexistent among public figures today. The late editor of the An Nahar newspaper will most certainly go down as one of the most fearless journalists in the history of Lebanese journalism. His stubborn instinct to speak freely, no matter what the consequences, was instantly remembered throughout the country on December 12, 2005 when he was brutally murdered in a massive explosion that also claimed the lives of his driver, Nicolas Flouti and bodyguard, Andre Mrad. MEB Journal was fortunate enough to speak to Tueni, a familiar face on Lebanese and Arab political talk shows, while self-exiling himself in Paris a few weeks before his death. Commenting on the killing of Samir Qassir, another prominent An Nahar writer last June, as well as the attempted murder of LBC anchorwoman May Chidiac in September; Tueni, 48, acknowledged that he too had made the “hit list.” Less than a day after returning to Beirut he was ambushed in car bomb attack, leaving behind his wife and four daughters.

How are the attacks on journalists affecting your work and political reporting in general?
It's not the first time that Lebanese journalists face these kinds of dangers.
We were always facing difficulties, in the 1920's, 1930's and 1940's; during the French mandate and after independence, we had a lot of problems with security services, also with Arab regimes like Abdul Nasser—lots of Lebanese journalists were assassinated.
The Lebanese press was and still is, I think, the only real free press that you have in the Arab World, especially because it is part of the private sector, which is completely different than what you have in Arab World, where the press is part of the public sector. It belongs to the king, to the prince or Emir. Without the Lebanese press and the free press that you have in Lebanon, you wouldn’t have really the beginning of free press In the Arab World.
It is because you had free television stations in Lebanon that you had Al Jazeera in Qatar and Al Arabiya. Everything began with TV stations in Lebanon, free and private TV stations. It is because you had independent newspapers in Lebanon that the Arab World began to talk about newspapers like Al Hayat and Al Shark Al Awsat which were all founded and built up by Lebanese journalists.
So the role of the press in this part of the world is able to implement a democratic system and freedom of speech in the Arab World, which is unique. And press in Lebanon played a major role in the 14th of March demonstration; played a major role in getting rid of the Syrian occupation in Lebanon.
So that role that we played is beginning now also to make the people in the Arab world move.

And this will continue, despite all of the violent attacks?
Yes because we think that the moment that we stop writing, first of all the violence will not stop, second we will lose everything: we will lose the message, we will lose the mission and the major role of our newspaper. So that’s why we think our role is important. We knew that the moment we chose to play that role, to be part of the big family of journalists, we knew that it would cost us maybe our lives. We knew that also the moment you decide to become a journalist in that part of the world, you should know that it could lead to death, to assassination. So it's normal for us, it’s the role that we play.

Were you threatened before leaving Lebanon?
I had threats. You know, An Nahar was always under pressure before and during the (civil) war. I was wounded twice during the war—I have been shot, kidnapped. An Nahar journalists had been assassinated, kidnapped also, and our offices were bombed many times. I left Lebanon in 1990 for a 3-year exile when the Syrians entered and occupied all of Lebanon.

What made you leave the country at that point?
I left because the Syrians. The Syrians wanted to kill me, it's very simple (chuckling). I left Lebanon now—a month ago—also because I received a note from the Ministry of Interior saying they had accurate information from the UN investigation committee that my name was on the top of a list, a hit list, that the people who assassinated Hariri wanted to eliminate because maybe of the role of An Nahar and all of what happening in Lebanon. Now I chose to leave, not because I'm afraid, but not to give a free gift to these people and second, because I'm a deputy (member of parliament) now and the people from government didn't want to have trouble and really told me that being outside Lebanon will help them a lot.

How will you protect yourself when return to Lebanon? Will you change anything about the way you live and work?
No, nothing. It has been like that since the beginning of the war—changing my habits, taking some precautions, but still, you know, I’m somebody who always drives alone with maybe one person with me to help with the car. I think the moment you will have to die, you will die. I told you, I've been shot twice, kidnapped. I have faith that the moment I will have to die, I will die. Now I've been taking precautions to protect the newspaper because I think it is an enterprise and I should protect it, because it will continue even after me, because of that mission. And yes, we have been asking journalists sometimes not to use their car but maybe to take taxis. We think we should give them the minimum of precautions at least so that morally they would feel comfortable

Is enough being done to highlight the attacks on Arab journalists?
Of course they should be highlighted more, because without free press, we will never have a free Arab World. Journalists are always the number one martyrs. These people are paying a very high price so public opinion can be free, so you can have a real democratic system.
I think that, yes, nobody talks enough about journalists who are the major persons on the frontlines defending human rights, defending freedom of speech, defending democracy. Newspapers and journalists are the real watchdogs that can put an end to corruption, put an end to all these kinds of totalitarian regimes. We need to highlight them because as much as we do, we will never do enough to pay tribute to them.

Giselle Khoury, the widow of recently murdered Lebanese Journalist Samir Qassir, cites the Syrian-Lebanese military-security regime as the main threat to journalists in Lebanon. Do you agree?
Yes, totalitarian military regimes have always been the number one enemies of journalists and free speech. That's why we are the number one enemies of the Syrian regime. That's why in Lebanon, we were in danger, because Lebanon was not independent; Lebanon was under occupation. And people who were ruling Lebanon were people from the Baathist Syrian regime; and the people who were placed in Lebanon, the president and everybody in Lebanon, was completely under the Syrian domination and named by the Syrians. All these people were just collaborating with the Syrians.

We probably wouldn't be having this conversation a year ago. Does this mean that there are new press freedoms in Lebanon?
No we always had this conversation…

But was it always so direct?
It was more than direct. If you take the An Nahar reports and editorials, all we have been writing is that ‘you Syrians are occupying Lebanon,’ that we need freedom, that the Arab World is not free, that we need people to move in the Arab World, we need public opinion to move in the Arab World. Now, what has changed is that the international community changed its policy towards Lebanon and Syria. And we have the 14th of March movement which brought Lebanese together, Muslim and Christians. This was unique yes. It helped us a lot.

Did it also help the press?
The press is free and was free. If we weren't free nobody would have been able to achieve what has been achieved in Lebanon. That's why the press in the #1 target. We were writing long time ago the same thing I am talking to you about now, and openly, on TV stations when they had the guts to interview us. I remember that I wrote an open letter to Bashar Assad in 2000 and everybody thought that I was completely mad to write such an open letter saying to Bashar Assad: ‘nobody loves you in Lebanon, people are afraid of you, you are an army occupation, we need to open a new page; if you want to change and open a new page, we will be able to do it, but you have to leave the country.

But wouldn’t you say that the political talk shows in Lebanon have become a bit more explicit recently, naming Syria, for example?
When you're talking about TV, it's completely different from when you are talking about the press. TV stations were not free because TV stations were owned by militias. TV stations came (into being) and had a permit to broadcast through different political settlements which obliged them and they were very happy to do so. I’m sorry to say so.

Is that changing now?
It's changing now because they are trying to play the role that they should have played before. Sorry to say it. I don't want to talk about them. I think that the role they played before was not a positive role. Always, from 1990s until now, they were under direct pressure from the secret service. They never tried to change. Journalists tried to change. I remember that May Chidiac for example, when she wanted to receive me, it was hell for her because she used to invite me without telling anyone. After the show, she used to receive thousands of phone calls from people at the station asking her, ‘why did you receive Gebran Tueni, you shouldn't have received him.’ The journalists were struggling, people like May and Marcel (Ghanem), were struggling, they were suffering. But the enterprise was not free because, okay it was built like that.

So you are saying that TV is becoming bolder?
Of course. Now journalists can be much more comfortable on TV than they were before, because before, TV stations were involved and obliged to accept the situation of the secret service.