Listen to the article
Politicians who recently met with the Qatari envoy revealed that they did not receive any specific candidate names from him, nor names that the Quintet (the United States, Saudi Arabia, France, Egypt and Qatar) might endorse. Instead, they disclosed that Qatar is actively engaged in efforts to involve the Islamic Republic of Iran in facilitating the upcoming presidential elections, without officially announcing its participation in the broader negotiation. The initial step within this framework involves persuading the Hezbollah-Amal Shiite duo to abandon their candidate, Marada leader Sleiman Frangieh.
These politicians emphasized that once this objective is achieved, Qatar, in coordination with the countries that participated in the Paris meeting, could begin suggesting candidate names to secure consensus and proceed to Parliament to confirm the agreed-upon candidate. It is important to note that opposition forces have informed both the French presidential envoy, Jean-Yves Le Drian, and the Qatari envoy that a consensus-based president does not equate to someone who allows the ongoing crisis to persist. Rather, they expect this individual to possess the ability to change the current governing approach which has been going on for decades.
According to sources within the opposition, there have been no substantial developments thus far, as Hezbollah and Amal continue to insist on pre-election dialogue, a stance that remains unacceptable. Additionally, they continue to support Frangieh as a candidate. Consequently, the opposition still views former Minister Jihad Azour as the consensus candidate by excellence, after MP Michel Mouawad who was perceived by the Shiite tandem as a challenger candidate.
As per the same sources, if the Hezbollah-Amal duo drops the requirement for dialogue and their endorsement of Frangieh, it could pave the way for a broad bilateral discussion process instead of a collective dialogue. Such a discussion has the potential to yield a consensus on a unifying figure, who has the ability to cooperate with all parties, to assume the presidency.
According to the opposition sources, no updated information regarding Le Drian’s recent initiatives concerning Lebanon has been received. Furthermore, there was no response from the French envoy regarding guarantees from Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri in terms of consecutive sessions with a fully met quorum. Consequently, how is it possible to expect the opposition to engage in dialogue when there are no guarantees for a presidential election under the pretext (known by the French envoy) that the quorum procedure is a democratic practice, and that no one can compel an MP to remain in the electoral session?
