The former general’s presidential election was made possible by the cross-party convergence of previously opposing forces. An institutional stalemate that lasted two- and-a-half years has ended. And the country of cedars has proved its interdenominational nature and vocation despite it all, showing the rest of the Middle East that a different future is possible, one that is not based on sectarian division.
Last June, the Bishop of Rome dodged a question put to him by Maronite priest, Rouphael Zgheib, about when he would be paying a visit to Lebanon, coming back at the director of Pontifical missionary works in Lebanon with a counter-question: “And when are you Lebanese going to elect your President?” Lebanon’s Presidential office has remained vacant for almost two and a half years and Vatican diplomatic protocol does not allow papal visits to nations experiencing such institutional paralysis. But now, the argument Francis used is no longer valid. On Monday 31 October, Lebanon elected the Maronite Christian and former general, Michel Aoun, as its new president. Lebanon’s entire institutional machine seems to be powering up again as Aoun confirmed the Sunni Saad Hariri as the country’s prime minister in 3 November. This turning point in Lebanon offers important keys to interpreting the current upheaval and possible future instability in the Middle East.
The final blow to Lebanon’s political institutions was experiences while Syria was being ravaged by war and IS jihadists were taking over Mosul and northern Iraq as well. 1,200,000 Syrian refugees poured into Lebanon. But national unity miraculously escaped contagion from the sectarian war that was raging on the other side of the border.
The Lebanese “formula” establishes the egalitarian participation pf Christians and Muslims on a Parliamentary, government and institutional office level. The system’s delicate equilibrium has handed the presidential office to a Maronite Christian. The opposing blocs that have dominated Lebanon’s political landscape for years are seen also in the Christian parties. The Free Patriotic Movement founded by Aoun is the most voted for party among the Christian community and is part of an alliance that includes Hezbollah, a Shiite party with its own confessional army, that has links with Iran and militarily aligned with the Syrian regime. An alliance which dates back to the 1990s but was set in stone during the 2006 Lebanon War. On the opposite front, Christian groups such as the Lebanese Forces, have forged a years-long alliance with Sunni party Future, called 14 March
After Michel Sleiman’s presidency ended (May 2014), clashes led to a standstill and the start of a crippling presidential vacuum. Numerous election rounds failed to reach a quorum as a result of constant boycotting, mainly by Hezbollah. Aoum’s path to the presidency was paved chiefly thanks to the scandalous U-turns that rocked the system of existing alliances. Last January, it was Samir Geagea, leader of the Lebanese Forces, who announced that his party was backing the former general’s candidacy - Aoun had been a political rival of his for decades. But what tipped the scales was the coalition formed by members of the Sunni Future Movement in support of Aoun. A cross-party “grand coalition” thus formed around Aoun in his run for the presidency. The coalition was made up of the most influential Shiite, Sunni and Maronite Christian parties.
82-year-old Aoun is a complex and certainly not “minor” figure in Lebanon’s recent political affair, a living symbol of a modus operandi marked by controversial alliance changes, in a context where yesterday’s mortal enemies can become today’s “comrades-in-arms”. At the end of the 1980s, in the final stage of the civil war, he was the standard-bearer of the Lebanese reaction against the dominance of Syrian armed forces in the country of cedars. At that time, Aoun had accepted the help and military assistance of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein – arch-enemy of former Syrian leader Hafez al Assad –against the Syrians. From 1990 to 2005 Aoun was forced to leave Lebanon, which had been invaded by the Syrian army, and go into exile in France. Upon his return home in 2005, he founded the Free Patriotic Movement, radically changing his alliance network: that was when he forged his privileged axis with Hezbollah, patched things up with Bashar Assad’s regime. His changing coalitions and the alliances forged with leaders and political powers that have been black-listed by north Atlantic diplomatic forces (Russia’s President Putin is among those celebrating his election), expose him to fierce critiques in many western circles. But to simply label Aoun a ruthless “transformist” is to show a scant understanding of Lebanon’s political alchemies, witnessed also in the presence of many former “mortal enemies” among the great voters who opened the doors of the presidential palace to him.
Aoun’s recent election as President could mark the start a new chapter with many unknowns, not just in Lebanon. Ever since 1990, after the Taif Agreement, which brought stability to Lebanon in the wake of the civil war, games between parties have always opted for individuals who act as a guarantee and do not carry much political influence as the presidential figure of choice. And the barycentre of power always stayed in the hands of the prime minister and the Parliament speaker. As head of state, Aoun can count on a substantial political base that will allow him to play more of a prominent role seeing as though the party he founded has the largest number of Christian MPs. His extensive experience, which began when he was head of Lebanon’s military, when the country was still rocked by civil war, means he is accustomed to the anomalous dynamics of Lebanese politics. “Compromise” seems to be the umbrella word that best describes each phase in the run-up to his election. A compromise between opposing forces and interests that come to an agreement, renouncing some of their demands.
On a regional level, Aoun’s election has been interpreted as a sign of Saudi Arabia’s diminished influence in the Middle East. In reality, the Sunni regional power was also involved, it approved the watershed event by backing Aoun’s chosen prime minister, the Sunni Saad Hariri, Saudi Arabia’s point of reference in Lebanon. Samer el Sabhan, the Saudi Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, was in Beirut in the days prior to Aoun’s election, where he held dense and reassuring discussions with Aoun and a series of political leaders and representatives of Lebanese institutions. Hezbollah’s Shiites also helped things along. In the negotiations held to coordinate everything, 46-year-old Gebran Bassil, Aoun’s son-in-law and leader of the Free Patriotic Movement cut out a special role for himself.
“Compromise and balance between powers,” Fr. Rouphael Zgheib remarked “has always been the conclusive formula for each major phase of Lebanese history. No one is supreme leader and no one is excluded. Each individual renounces something but gains more than what they gave up.”
In recent years, a sectarianism fomented throughout the area is putting a strain on Lebanon’s multi-confessionalism. The equal partnership between Christians and Muslims in the country’s political management, as laid out in the Taif Agreement, no longer corresponds to the country’s demographic balance, altered by an increase in numbers and the socio-political reinforcement of the Shiite element.
As leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, Aoun has always sought to present himself as a staunch defender of Christians’ rights – including political rights – in the country of cedars. “The Christian president must be representative of his community and not just be the candidate Sunnis and Shiites agree on,” he said in an interview with Famille chrétienne in June, speaking about his presidential candidacy. In March 2015 he had launched an appeal for Christian refugees from Syria to be welcomed in Lebanon and referred to the “systematic uprooting” of communities who “have been living in the East forever” as “criminal”. In the meantime, Aoun has shown that he is able to manage political alliances with bodies that have a strong identitarian element, notably the Hezbollah Shiites, the “Party of God”. Ove r the coming years, the Lebanese will face the challenge – and the unknown – of a political class that has in many ways been discredited but inevitably called to manage the influence of confessions, stemming the sectarianism and tribalism that have destroyed Syria and Iraq. Without seeking to force through Western-inspired political frameworks. Bearing in mind that universal criteria for citizenship and equality before the law are pursued and progressively achieved, not in an abstract way but through real, direct contact with the country.
On this journey that awaits the Lebanese people, the Maronite Church – which does not tend to confine itself within the ghetto of an intimidated and grumbling “minority” - is also asked to contribute its historic wisdom and realistic outlook. In an interview with Vatican Insider, Maronite Patriarch Béchara Boutros Raï, said: “Middle Eastern Christians are aware of the limits, respect the laws and established authorities. They are fully conscious of the fact that they live in countries where Islam is the state religion and Sharia is the principal source of laws. They want reforms, of course. But they respect the fact that it takes time.”
