Political divisions and deadlock threaten Lebanon's fragile democracy
Beirut (AsiaNews) - Democracy in Lebanon has been hijacked, its political system rapidly ossifying. In recent years, the country has gradually moved away from democracy, but the coup de grace came when the National Assembly voted in June to extend its own mandate. Attempts to override this were blocked by Hizbollah with the complicity of Druze leader Walid Jumblatt.
By not showing up, the Constitutional Council's two Shia and one Druze members prevented it from dealing with a request from the president to invalidate the extension. By their action, some said, the two groups prevented a quorum in the Council itself. That is not true. What is ture is that, twice, a quorum was denied in order to carry out a constitutionally unlawful deed, with a minority abusing its power. The views of three members prevailed over that of the other seven, allowing the extension to go through. This way, democracy has been used against democracy.
This is exactly what is happening in Egypt, where, by democratic means, anti-democratic forces began to tear down the democracy that allowed them to come to power, causing a popular uprising that legitimised the intervention of the military. Again, democracy has been used against democracy.
Domestically, Lebanon is now in a deadlock. Najib Mikati's government is running current affairs, as Hizbollah's conditions prevent his appointed successor, moderate Tammam Salam, to form a new cabinet. The country's political forces have neutralised each other.
Is Lebanon going to break apart, as some predict? This is not likely for several reasons. First, no single power could do it. As one noteworthy observer put it, the only group that could do it, Hizbollah, does not want to do it since its military involvement in Syria requires implicitly peace at home.
Likewise, even if it wanted to, the (Sunni) Future Movement of Saad Hariri (son of Rafic Hariri) does not have the means to do it. Certainly, the Future Movement, and most Lebanese would like a showdown with Hizbollah's military wing, which has paralysed and undermined Lebanese democracy, but the former has never sought a bloodbath, unlike the Jihadists to which it has been associated.
Owing to domestic political reasons and Iranian-Saudi rivalry, Hizbollah, whose goal is to turn Lebanon into an Iranian stronghold, has been doing its utmost to blur the differences between moderate and extremist Islam.
Such a distortion is one of the challenges launched by political Shia Islam, which has successfully carved out a territory for itself where even Lebanon's regular forces need permission to operate.
Other factors going against a wider conflict are, on the military and security level, a Lebanese army that is better adept at keeping under control Sunni Jihadism with limited losses, as was the case with Ahmad al-Asir, as well as the country's small territory and the containment of its no-go areas.
Some fear overcrowding caused by the influx of Syrian refugees, which may have serious social, economic and other consequences. But this is more of a public order question than a political issue.
Finally, for Israel, peace is a real but unpredictable "danger", something US Secretary of State John Kerry appears to be ignoring.
In short, at this stage of its political and social development, Lebanon is going backward. Our country is a collection of communities that can resist those who want to dominate it, whilst the latter are proving incapable of figuring out what they want and come up with a shared plan.
The source of this backward step is an armed party that prevents the state from fully exercising its sovereignty, which is the only way to unite and unify these communities.
.png)
09/06/2021 16:25
25/07/2005
