Listen to the article


The Quintet grouping France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and the United States has recently solidified its position regarding the stalled presidential elections. According to analysts in Beirut, the five countries have reached a firmer agreement on two pivotal matters: the urgency of establishing a “deadline” for electing a president and the need to pursue a “third path.”

Eleven months after the end of former President Michel Aoun’s term, and as local and international efforts to elect a new head of state continue to yield no results, the attention of the Lebanese remains fixed on every local and international meeting addressing this issue.

This was notably the case with the meeting held on Wednesday in Riyadh between Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Faysal bin Farhan, France’s special envoy to Lebanon Jean-Yves Le Drian, Saudi Ambassador to Beirut Walid Bukhari and Advisor to the Saudi Royal Court responsible for the Lebanese dossier Nizar al-Alaoula.

A statement by the Saudi Press Agency said, “Bilateral relations and various ways to enhance French-Saudi coordination were discussed. The parties reviewed the latest developments in the Lebanese dossier and also studied regional and international events and the efforts deployed in this respect.”

While waiting for a concrete outcome of this meeting, it’s worth noting that the stance of the five countries concerned with Lebanon’s presidential election has surely evolved. According to analysts in Beirut, these countries have reached a “firmer agreement” on two specific points: the urgency of setting a “deadline” for election and the need to pursue a “third path.”

Eagerness

The weariness of the Quintet’s members was clearly expressed by Jean-Yves Le Drian in his interview with AFP on Tuesday. “Political leaders are in a state of denial that drives them to pursue tactical maneuvers at the expense of the country’s interests,” declared President Macron’s personal envoy to Lebanon.

“The five countries are fully unified, profoundly irritated, and are questioning the sustainability of their financial support to Lebanon while political leaders revel in irresponsibility,” Le Drian said.

The same exasperation was already voiced by US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf eight days ago during a meeting of the representatives of the Five in New York, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.

According to an analyst, Washington, similarly to the Group of Five, is also concerned about the consequences of the prolonged leadership vacuum in Lebanon’s most pivotal institutions. Following the presidency and the Central Bank vacancies, a new deadline is approaching: General Joseph Aoun’s tenure as Chief of the military institution ends on January 10, 2024. If the State’s power structures continue to be plagued by chaos, there is a palpable fear among Lebanon’s allies that matters could swiftly deteriorate.

A third path

Lebanese opposition forces declared a few weeks ago that the Group of Five as a whole and France in particular have embraced the option of a “third candidate” or “third path.”

These countries have recognized that former ministers Sleiman Frangieh (the candidate of the March 8 Alliance, more specifically Hezbollah) and Jihad Azour (who is supported by sovereignist blocs and secured the votes of the Free Patriotic Movement and 9 out of the 12 Change MPs in the last electoral session on June 14) could not be elected.

During Le Drian’s third mission to Beirut less than two weeks ago, opposition MPs disclosed that the French envoy had clearly abandoned the previous French initiative. The latter entailed the election of Sleiman Frangieh as president in exchange for appointing Judge Nawaf Salam as prime minister. Le Drian had previously suggested the option of a third candidate, and according to parliamentary sources, he has inquired with the parliamentary blocs about the potential candidacy of Army Commander General Joseph Aoun.

However, despite this, (pro-Hezbollah) March 8 circles continue to deny that such a shift had been made by Paris, emphasizing that the Frangieh option is still valid. Following Le Drian’s AFP interview, it has become undeniably clear that the Group of Five has jointly endorsed the “third path.” He firmly stated, “Neither side can prevail,” referring to the candidates of the opposed camps, and added, “It is crucial for political actors to end this crisis which is unbearable for the Lebanese people and strive to find a middle-ground solution through a third path.”

Iran’s role

Furthermore, a political analyst points out that Hezbollah, while still holding onto its support for Sleiman Frangieh’s candidacy, appears to have opened a slight breach in the impasse by alluding to a possible “regional consensus.” According to this analyst, the Shiite party may have thrown the ball into Iran’s court, especially as there are reports of an upcoming resumption of direct dialogue between Tehran and Washington.

Iran and the United States recently concluded a prisoner exchange deal under which $6 billion belonging to Iran has been transferred from a frozen account in South Korea to an account in Qatar, giving Tehran access to these funds.

Will this potential US-Iranian rapprochement impact the Lebanese presidential issue? If so, in favor of which candidate? What will Iran ask for in return? It is too early to venture into providing definitive answers to these questions.