Political analyst Farid Khazen said that ‘referendums can only be taken into account in countries where there is genuine democracy’

By Nayla Assaf
Daily Star staff

Druze Leader Walid Jumblatt’s claims that he plans to hold a referendum over the Syrian presence here upon his return from Britain surprisingly stirred little, if any reaction.
While speaking to talk show host Tim Sebastian earlier this week during an interview, which is scheduled to be aired Monday, Jumblatt reportedly said “let’s hold a referendum.” He later reportedly pledged to hold one upon his return.
But what did Jumblatt really mean? Observers believe that this is yet another twist in positions, which the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party has become famous for.
Jumblatt was not available for comment as he was on his way back to Lebanon when
The Daily Star went to press and his allies preferred to let him reply personally.
But surprisingly, although similar remarks coming from him usually stir the whole country, this time, only Jbeil MP and opposition figure Fares Soueid reacted, welcoming his initiative with the condition that there be international monitoring.
Previously, before the 2000 parliamentary elections, Jumblatt’s one-time pro-sovereignty remarks had brought upon him the wrath of pro-Syrian politicians and had triggered a great increase in his popularity especially in right-wing Christian circles.
According to George Haddad, a member of the politburo of the pro-sovereignty Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) “Jumblatt has accustomed us to shifting positions.”
Haddad said that his changes in positions have become “a tradition,” but he welcomed the idea of a referendum.
According to him the FPM has already proposed the idea several times. “But this can only work provided there is freedom of expression.”
According to constitutional expert Edmond Naim, Jumblatt’s words expose the solution to a long-standing problem, “the country’s biggest problem. Perhaps he said them as a joke and perhaps he said them to irritate those who are for the sovereignty of Lebanon. But it’s true. Let there be a referendum.”
Naim reiterated that the Syrian presence here is anti-constitutional and that with or without a referendum, they should not be on Lebanese territory anyway.
But he also drew attention to another problem, which most people do not dare to say out loud: “There are two national identities in Lebanon. The first is the Muslim Arab nationality and the second is the Christian Arab nationality. They have been there since before
independence and no one can deny that.”
Naim said that for this reason, the referendum should be divided into two and conducted for Muslims and Christians separately “and if one faction wants to join Syria then by all means, let them. It is their right and no one can force them to live in this country,” he said.
When asked of the possible mechanisms of such a proposal, Naim said that “it could either be a confederation (between the parts that want to join Syria and the others), a federation or we could have two perfectly independent states. But if some people don’t want to live in an independent and sovereign Lebanon then they can very well request to be annexed,” he added.
According to political analyst Farid Khazen “referendums can only be taken into account in countries where there is genuine democracy. But here, parliamentary elections are rigged and presidential elections get decided outside Lebanon.”
“Having a referendum in a country like Switzerland, for example, I would understand. But not here.”
Khazen, like Haddad, stressed that if there is to be a referendum, Lebanon would need to bring-in the United Nations to monitor it. “The polls should not happen without a third party such as the UN supervising them,” he said.
“But then again, even if it happens, would the Syrians accept to withdraw? I doubt it,” he said. “This offer was not serious. I believe he just said it out of the blue,” Khazen concluded.