Listen to the article
The Moderate Bloc’s initiative for breaking the presidential deadlock suffered a significant setback from those who had initially blessed it. Despite widespread support from opposition forces, the initiative quickly stumbled over procedural glitches, including who should convene and preside consultation sessions, and who should ensure the integrity of the election proceedings and guarantee a quorum. Last but not least, Hezbollah’s Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc is a serious obstacle as it implicitly rejected the initiative by reaffirming its staunch support to controversial candidate, Marada Movement leader Sleiman Frangieh. Furthermore, the Shiite bloc, just like the Marada and the National Consensus Bloc, hasn’t yet responded to the suggestions put forward by the Moderate Bloc, a strong indication that the initiative is facing significant constraints.
Sources within the Lebanese Forces (LF) believe that Hezbollah’s insistence on backing Frangieh’s candidacy, and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri’s pressing demand for having a dialogue session as a prerequisite for the presidential election point to one key matter: Rejection of the electoral process, as “Iran hasn’t given the green light yet.”
In this regard, a presidential candidate believes that a president will be the outcome of a much-awaited regional settlement, arguing that the head of Hezbollah’s Liaison and Coordination Unit Wafiq Safa’s visit to the UAE falls within the context of settlement talks, though it came under the cover of following up on the release of Lebanese Shiite nationals detained in UAE prisons. According to the LF sources, Safa’s visit was organized several months ago with the cooperation of Syria, where Safa met with the Emirati National Security Advisor, Tahnon bin Zayed. Oman also played a role in organizing Safa’s visit to the UAE, as part of broader efforts towards a settlement and facilitating the integration of Hezbollah into the plan for a new Middle East in line with an international agenda.
Safa’s visit to the UAE also included talks about disengaging the conflict in Gaza from the one in southern Lebanon. In fact, prior to his visit, the southern front witnessed a significant decrease in tension. This came after Hezbollah’s decision to reduce the number of its fighters along the border. Could this step pave the way for ending military actions in this area in conjunction with Gaza’s expected ceasefire? Such a development could help reactivate the implementation of Resolution 1701 and resolve the dispute over the contested border points. Since the election of the president will likely result from a broader rather than an internal consensus, any efforts in that direction are rather wasted. It explains why Hezbollah is maintaining its support for Sleiman Frangieh’s candidacy, knowing that the regional settlement has yet to materialize.
One of such efforts is the Bkerke meeting that brought together all the Christian parties except the Marada Movement which refused to participate. Prior to the meeting, the LF and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) presented to Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rai documents outlining their political vision. According to one of the participants, the litigious issue under discussion was Hezbollah’s military arsenal, while 90% of the other topics were agreed upon. A formula for settling the Shiite party’s arms has to be approved by the FPM, on the basis of implementing international resolutions, especially 1559, which was largely advocated by former president and FPM founder, Michel Aoun.
For that reason, the Marada Movement has refrained from participating in the Bkerke meeting despite repeated invitations. In response to accusations leveled against Christians – especially Maronites –, blaming their disagreements for the inability to elect a president, Christian circles’ comment was, “When we agreed on a candidate, and the FPM aligned with the opposition and sovereign forces in supporting Jihad Azour, the Shiite MPs disrupted the quorum of the second round of the June 24 session, when Azour received 59 votes and Frangieh 51, fearing Azour’s victory.”
However, Western diplomatic sources assert that the presidential dossier is currently in the spotlight. As a result, Doha called upon Lebanese figures for consultations, from which Nabih Berri opted out, dispatching instead MP Ali Hassan Khalil, to convey his position. The sources also emphasize that the settlement being discussed is broader than the Doha Agreement of 2008, (which ended the political crisis then with the election of Michel Sleiman), but less elaborate than the 1989 Taif Accord (which ended Lebanon’s 15-year civil war.)
Anti-Hezbollah sovereign forces are firmly opposed to any amendment to the political system or the Taif Agreement. In their view, such changes should happen when the time is ripe locally and regionally, especially as the region is moving towards a new order that could be characterized by “no arms outside legitimacy.”
In this regard, an Arab official assert that any resolution must adhere to the framework laid out in the Taif Agreement which consecrates a formula for coexistence and strengthens national unity based on parity between Christians and Muslims – a cornerstone of Taif that must remain untainted lest it imperils both unity and the established system.
