Listen to the article
Amidst the constant and often conflicting information surrounding the presidential race, the Lebanese populace remains wary, much like Saint Thomas, cautiously awaiting concrete evidence of a positive outcome. However, there are indications that the long-awaited conclusion might be imminent, as recent developments have hinted at the possibility of reaching the finish line soon.
Several reliable sources indicate that a memorandum of understanding has been reached regarding the candidacy of former minister Jihad Azour. This agreement involves a coalition of opposition groups, including the Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb party, Michel Moawad’s bloc, the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP), and independent MPs, as well as Gebran Bassil’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM).
It has been reported that Azour, who had close ties to the late Rafic Hariri and the Future Movement, recently made a brief visit to Beirut. During his visit, he reportedly held meetings with various key figures, including Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berry, Gebran Bassil, Samy Gemayel, the leader of the Kataeb party, former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, as well as independent members of Parliament and members of the Joumblatt bloc. Adding to the intrigue, former MP Elie Ferzli claimed in a TV interview that Azour had at least two meetings with Mohammed Raad, Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc leader.
While certain observers may rush to declare the game over and the outcome sealed, it would be premature to do so. A single unforeseen obstacle could still impede the current momentum. The looming presence of numerous obstacles, particularly within the Free Patriotic Movement, threatens to undermine the current optimism.
Bassil’s Track Record prior to 2006
It is undeniable that the leadership of the Lebanese Forces and the Kataeb party cautiously approach Bassil’s position regarding Azour’s. They are concerned that the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement may be tempted to reach an agreement with the opposition in order to take advantage of this situation and raise the stakes with Hezbollah. Furthermore, Bassil is seeking additional gains and privileges in exchange for supporting the election of a president aligned with the pro-Iranian faction. This suggests that Bassil is engaging in a self-serving ‘deal’ driven by narrow political calculations, without fully acknowledging the deep state of collapse the country has been enduring for years.
The apprehensions of the Lebanese Forces and the Kataeb party, in particular, are well-founded because Bassil has a history of procrastination and playing both sides. In 2006, he conducted simultaneous and discrete negotiations with both Hezbollah and Saad Hariri, the leader of the Future Movement, in order to choose the best offer. Eventually, he firmly aligned himself with Hezbollah, disregarding the principles of sovereignty that the FPM claimed to uphold. The rest is history. However, at that time, such maneuvers might have been tolerable, since the country had not yet sunk into the total and pervasive collapse it faces today.
The question now arises: Is Bassil engaging in the similar cynical and very destructive double game under current circumstances? Uncertainty looming in this regard has prompted Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces, to call on Bassil to publicly and unequivocally declare his support for Azour’s candidacy, without delay.
The upcoming days should dispel any doubts regarding Azour’s candidacy, although several politicians, including MP Fady Karam (Lebanese Forces), state that Bassil has indeed chosen to reach an agreement with the opposition regarding Azour’s candidacy.
Blocking Kanaan’s Path
According to sources aligned with the sovereignist camp, the FPM leader’s decision to back Azour was motivated by partisan and self-serving reasons, primarily in order to obstruct MP Ibrahim Kanaan’s candidacy.  Although he is a prominent figure within the FPM bloc, his relationship with Bassil has been largely strained.
Given the current circumstances, Kanaan’s chances of reaching the presidency are not insignificant. Reportedly a significant number of MPs within the Aounist bloc appear to oppose Azour’s nomination, arguing that his close ties to the Future Movement would make it more reasonable for the FPM to engage in negotiations with the opposition in order to secure the candidacy of a member who maintains good relations with the sovereignist camp. And in this regard, Kanaan would be the most suitable candidate, as he could benefit from the support of the Lebanese Forces, especially since he played a key role, along with MP Melhem Riachi, in reconciling the Lebanese Forces and the FPM in 2016. Furthermore, despite Bassil’s subsequent aggressive campaign against the Lebanese Forces, Kanaan never aligned himself with positions that were hostile to the party.
Kanaan’s perceived advantages are believed to have influenced the FPM leader’s decision to support Azour. It is however unclear whether this choice will be endorsed by the group of Aounist MPs, who have consistently maintained a reserved and distant stance towards Bassil. The recent statement by MP Alain Aoun gains significance in this context, as he asserts that the page of Jihad Azour has been turned and emphasizes that the agreement with the opposition should focus on a candidate from the FPM bloc.
According to well-informed observers, a meeting involving key Aounist figures along with Bassil and Kanaan will be held in the near future in an attempt to reach a unified position.
Due to Bassil’s political calculations and egocentric motives, this internal dissonance within the FPM adds an element of uncertainty to the agreement reached on Azour’s candidacy. The upcoming meeting between Maronite Patriarch Bechara Rai and President Emmanuel Macron at the Élysée Palace next Tuesday may provide further insight into the situation. In the meantime, the Lebanese will likely adopt a cautious approach, similar to that of Saint Thomas, as they await further developments.
