|
||
|
||
| Facing the Abyss:
Lebanon's Deadly Political Stalemate By Mona Yacoubian As the third anniversary of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri approaches, Lebanon is witnessing its worst crisis since the 15-year civil war. Hariris February 14th assassinationwidely suspected to have been orchestrated by Syriaenraged the Lebanese who took to the streets one month later, demanding the withdrawal of Syrian troops. Dubbed the Cedar Revolution, this mass protest movement succeeded in ending nearly 30 years of Syrian military occupation. It was to have ushered in a new era of democracy. Instead, Lebanon has suffered through bombings, assassinations, war between Hezbollah and Israel, and bouts of sectarian violence. Today, Lebanon is plagued by a protracted political stalemate between a rump government led by the anti-Syrian March 14th coalition (inheritors of the Cedar Revolution) and the Hezbollah-led opposition. This dangerous deadlock has propelled Lebanon once again toward the abyss of civil war. Despite intensive Arab and European mediation efforts, a political compromise does not appear imminent.1 Rather, Lebanon seems poised to endure weeks, if not months, of continued paralysis and violence. This USIPeace Briefing examines some of the key issues underlying Lebanons current political turmoil. Origins of the Impasse Political infighting between the government and the opposition continued throughout 2007, with minimal progress toward compromise. If anything, the parties became more entrenched in their respective positions, amidst deepening suspicion and distrust. An assassination campaign mounted against anti-Syrian parliamentarians has forced forty MPs to seek safe haven in a Beirut luxury hotel since last autumn.2 The political deadlock grew more acute following the expiration of pro-Syrian President Emile Lahouds term in November 2007. The presidency has been vacant since Lahoud stepped down, with the Siniora government at loggerheads with the Hezbollah-led opposition over the terms surrounding the election of a new president. The Lebanese parliament has not met in more than a year, and the presidential vote has been postponed fourteen times. The next vote is scheduled for February 26, although a resolution to the crisis remains unlikely. While the opposing factions appear to have agreed on army
commander Michel Suleiman as a consensus presidential candidate, the crux of the crisis
centers on Hezbollahs insistent demands for veto power over government decisions.
Specifically, the party is calling for control of one-third plus one of the cabinet seats
(known as the "blocking third"), effectively serving as a potential veto on key
policies that require two-thirds cabinet approval. While Hezbollahs push for greater
political influence taps into a longstanding sense of alienation and marginalization
prevalent within the Shia community, its insistence on a veto undoubtedly is rooted in the
armed movements desire to keep its weapons, despite numerous UN resolutions
demanding that it disarm. As well, Hezbollah likely wants to protect its Syrian ally by
obstructing movement on the UN-sponsored international tribunal established to prosecute
those implicated in the Hariri assassination. Finally, ongoing strikes and street demonstrations have sporadically erupted into more serious bouts of civil violence and rioting, often with sectarian undertones. In the most recent (and serious) episode, Shia demonstrators took to the streets in southern Beirut in January 2008 to protest continuing electricity cuts. Riots broke out after one of the protestors was shot under murky circumstances. Clashes spread to other parts of Beirut and at least seven people were killed in the ensuing violence. Perhaps most ominously, numerous reports over the past several months suggest that large numbers of Lebanese are arming themselves in the event such rioting spirals out of control, and the country descends into civil war. To date, parties to the conflict have exercised some
restraint, managing to rein in protestors when demonstrations deteriorate into violence.
Leaders of both the March 14th coalition and the Hezbollah-led opposition have asserted
repeatedly their desires to avoid civil war, which is not in either factions
interest. Certainly, for everyday Lebanese, the memories of the 1975-1990 civil war serve
as a strong disincentive toward violence. Nonetheless, in Lebanons dysfunctional
political system, violence is often employed to serve political purposes. The anti-Syrian
MP assassination campaign stands as one example. Indeed, Syria, in particular, is accused
of perpetuating the violence to assert its influence following its forced military
withdrawal. Hezbollah, for its part, often uses popular protests as a key tool to raise
the pressure politically, encouraging strikes and exhorting its followers to take to the
streets in demonstrations. Given Lebanons volatility, any miscalculationor
exploitation of the situation by shadowy forces that wish to ignite a civil warcould
easily lead to violence spiraling out of control. At the core of this crisis lies the longstanding battle for Lebanons identity, an issue that arguably has dogged the country since its independence in 1943, if not its creation in 1920 following the break-up of the Ottoman Empire. A corollary, intertwining issue revolves around Lebanons ties to external actorsnamely the United States and Europe on the one hand and Syria and Iran on the other. Each faction leverages its ties to external supporters to gain advantage in the domestic power struggle. At the same time, these outside players often fight their proxy battles via their allies in Lebanon. Under these circumstances, arriving at a consensus solution is extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible. The key challenge is to walk both factions back from the brink and to restore some level of trust and confidence, rather than continuing to feed mounting dissension and fear. External agitation (particularly Syrian-inspired) and attempts to dissuade the factions from compromise must cease. Instead, mediation efforts should focus on disentangling foreign agendas from Lebanese internal questions and implementing confidence-building measures to help bridge the chasm between the conflicting parties and begin the long road toward a consensus. Ultimately, two key issues must be addressed: first, the
need to apportion political power to reflect the rising aspirations of the Shia community
(considered to be the largest among Lebanons sects), while preserving Lebanons
unique multi-confessional character.3 Second, to the extent possible, external issues must
be de-linked from Lebanons internal complexities. Progress resolving key regional
conflicts (Arab-Israeli, U.S.-Iran) that are often played out in Lebanon will be
essential. While these goals may be distant ideals, working toward them will help to
rescue Lebanon from its current turmoil and realize its potential as a stable, democratic
model for the region. 2. Four anti-Syrian MPs have been assassinated since December 2005 in an attempt to eliminate the slim parliamentary majority held by the March 14th coalition. 3. Lebanons complex confessional system is made up of
some 18 different religious sects. The last national census in Lebanon was undertaken in
1932. While estimates of the current confessional breakdown in Lebanon are difficult to
assess, broader demographic trends suggest that the Muslim, particularly Shia, population
has increased, while the Christian population continues to decline. |