I do not think many people paid attention to the news story about our government sending Canadians to join an EU observer mission for Lebanon’s parliamentary elections on June 7. Approximately 80 observers will oversee the voting, counting and tabulation of results.
“The Government of Canada continues to support election observation missions, aiming to ensure all elections are fair and democratic,” said Beverley J. Oda, Minister of International Cooperation. “This support demonstrates Canada’s commitment to strengthening democracy and stability in Lebanon,” added Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Sending observers on a mission of this type is good and the motivation is even better. Who doesn’t want to strengthen democracy and stability in Lebanon? you may ask. Lebanon, not Israel, is the most democratic country in the region.
But in late April, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton showed up unannounced in Beirut calling for an election “free of outside interference,” implicitly threatening people not to vote for Hezbollah candidates. “The people of Lebanon must be able to choose their own representatives in open and fair elections without the specter of violence or intimidation and free of outside interference.”
(She should have been honest and said, “free of outside interference, except from the United States, of course.”)
“Beyond the elections, we will continue to support the voices of moderation in Lebanon and the responsible institutions of the Lebanese state they are working hard to build. Our on-going support for the Lebanese armed forces remains a pillar of our bilateral cooperation,” she said.
Following Israel’s war with Lebanon in the summer of 2006, there was an 18-month political deadlock in nominating a president. Without a president, fears of a return to civil war were real. At the time, I happened to be having dinner with some Lebanese journalists, and I said to them:
“Every time when I thought your leaders are about to reach an agreement, they fail and go back to square one. I am disappointed. I know many Lebanese. They are smart and are politically savvy. What is going on?”
Their answer was clear: “The U.S. sends its envoy as soon as the different parties are close to a solution to sabotage it. The closer the different parties are to a solution the higher the rank of that envoy.”
If these Lebanese journalists were right and given the fact that the U.S. had sent the Secretary of State to Lebanon last April, then the U.S. strongly feels that the current opposition including Hezbollah will become the majority and form the next government.
Replacing the pro-U.S. government in Lebanon with a national coalition of political parties including Hezbollah is a real possibility.
Lebanon’s National Assembly is made up of 128 seats divided equally between Christians and Muslims. The seats are further subdivided among the nation’s 18 recognized religious sects. The system has served the country well.
The government, a coalition of Sunni, Druze and Christian parties, currently holds 70 seats. Named “The March 14 Alliance,” it’s led by Saad Al-Hariri, billionaire son of ex-Prime Minster Rafik Al-Hariri, who was assassinated in February 2005.
Opposition parties hold 58 seats. In addition to Hassan Nasrallah’s Hezbollah, these include Nabih Berri’s Amal Party, and General Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement. Nasrallah and Berri are Shia Muslims; Aoun is a Maronite Christian.
Almost all Shia candidates belong to the opposition parties, and almost all Sunni candidates belong to the government parties. They will most likely keep their seats. The swing vote belongs to the Christians: Would they vote for Aoun’s FPM or for the other Christian parties affiliated with the government.
But the opposition only needs to win an additional seven seats to gain a majority-a real possibility come June 7.
Recent Comments