The recent visit of the Vatican’s Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, reflected, in one of its aspects, the insistence of the Vatican, Washington, Paris, and Western and Arab capitals on “adhering to the Taif Agreement and the Constitution as a way out of the presidential deadlock.”
Informed sources revealed that Parolin underlined in his encounters with Christian groups that “Taif is the lifebuoy to which they must adhere to, and that it is the only basis for a solution to the Lebanese crisis.”
“Stick to Taif as it is. Do not try to look for amendments or reconsider the political system and structure, such as federalism, etc., before Taif is fully implemented and a president is elected according to the constitutional text.”
Amending the Taif agreement aims at preventing the election of a president, maintaining the vacancy and the disruption of the constitution, and enduring the crisis. Amendments to the Taif Agreement can be discussed later, when circumstances permit, not now, because this might have adverse repercussions on Lebanon as a message and model of coexistence, and a space for dialogue of religions and civilizations.
For the Vatican and the West, the primary task of parliamentarians is to elect a president. “You must apply the constitution, which provides for the mechanism that is endorsed by the Lebanese for electing a president,” Parolin has reportedly told Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, given his primary role in facilitating the process by calling for an electoral session without conditions.
The 1989 Taif Agreement put an end to Lebanon’s 15-year-long civil war by dividing powers equally between Christians and Muslims.
