Search
Search

EDITORIAL

In Lebanon, the beginning of a new era?


At what point can one indulge in optimism as a Lebanese? Just a few weeks ago, the future seemed entirely bleak. The war was still present. The country appeared on the verge of implosion. Regional and international developments were most concerning. And Lebanon, this precious idea that should be protected at all costs, continued to deteriorate without triggering a real national awakening. We were prisoners of a history we had largely contributed to writing. We still are, to some extent. But hope is now allowed.

The election of Joseph Aoun marks Lebanon's entry into a new era. It would not have been possible without Hezbollah's defeat, the fall of the Syrian regime and the collapse of the "axis of resistance." Lebanon is officially no longer a province of Damascus and Tehran. This is significant enough to overshadow everything else. But this should not make us forget that the hardest part remains to be done.

Lebanon is still a fragmented country, that has never turned the page on a war that began almost fifty years ago. It is still a partly ruined country, occupied by Israelis and nibbled away by Iranians. It is still an unreformable country, where everything is a matter of power struggles and small arrangements, where the clan comes before the community, and the community before the nation.

Joseph Aoun's excellent speech, firm and unifying, contrasted with the dismal spectacle we once again witnessed during the session. This circus is sometimes amusing, it must be acknowledged. But it is most often pathetic. It shows – even to ambassadors invited to participate in the session for the occasion – a Lebanon that rots from the head but whose body is not much better off. Everything, from the invectives to sexist remarks, from small accolades to populism contests, from the unraveling of the Constitution to the grotesque staging of the tandem that negotiated, until the last minute, the price of its defeat, has the potential to shame us. Especially when we know that without the sustained and assumed interferences of Saudi Arabia, the United States and France, we would still have no president.

Read more:

The best of the worst that our Lebanese MPs have shown in 13 electoral sessions

If these countries insisted so much on Joseph Aoun being elected, it is primarily for geopolitical reasons. The new president must embody Lebanon's shift into another sphere of influence. Its emergence from the Iranian shadow, and its rapprochement with Arab countries and Western powers, is the only way to obtain the necessary funds for reconstruction, which the Shiite tandem has finally come to accept. It would be dishonest, however, to compare the influence of some – who seek to strengthen the state – to that of others, who sought instead to devour it.

The mission of Joseph Aoun is so complex that it is necessary, from the start, to clearly define it and not to ask too much of him. First, because the idea that a providential man can single-handedly save a country has done enough damage here or elsewhere for us not to have to witness it again at our expense. Secondly, because the former army leader, who seems to want to revive the idea of a "strong presidency," not really in the spirit of Taif, has limited prerogatives and will have to take political balances into account. Finally, because we do not yet know much about Joseph Aoun, his economic, social or diplomatic vision, even if his speech outlined promising but vague broad lines.

The new head of state will have to accept to participate in the political game without compromising. He will also have the heavy task of reconnecting Lebanon with the Arab world and establishing healthy and sustainable relations with Syria. Sometimes compared to Fouad Shehab, he could lay the foundations for the (re)construction of a modern state.

But to achieve this, he must first accomplish his main mission, the one for which he was elected: Making Hezbollah accept becoming a political party like any other.

The pro-Iranian group is wounded but far from defeated. It can no longer impose but can still paralyze. It has understood that it has an interest in letting go, prioritizing national interest, for the good of its own community, but this does not mean it is ready to disarm. It leaves the south of the Litani under international pressure. It is prevented from rearming and funding under the pressure of the international community. But the core issue for Joseph Aoun will be negotiating the maintenance of the militia's arms north of the Litani. By integrating them into the army, with the risk of causing it to implode? By showing strength, with the specter of a new civil war? Given his background, he will probably opt for the first option.

If he manages to disarm Hezbollah without alienating the Shiite community, Joseph Aoun will have more than succeeded in his mandate. The objective is epic. But the general seems best equipped, without any bad pun intended, to achieve it. So yes, for once, optimism is allowed. But as a distinguished diplomat reminded us a few days ago, "like any drug, it should be consumed in moderation."

This article was originally published in French in L'Orient-Le Jour.

At what point can one indulge in optimism as a Lebanese? Just a few weeks ago, the future seemed entirely bleak. The war was still present. The country appeared on the verge of implosion. Regional and international developments were most concerning. And Lebanon, this precious idea that should be protected at all costs, continued to deteriorate without triggering a real national awakening. We were...