|
*
The Game of Delegation and Recanting in Lebanon
Al-Hayat, UK,
December 15, 2007
By Walid Choucair
Parliament
Speaker Nabih Berri returned the conflict in Lebanon to its
regional arena once again. When he decided to recant on the
agreement that he had reached with the leader of the
Mustakbal Movement, Saad Hariri on Friday December 7, he did
so because he discovered that this agreement did not have
the adequate regional coverage, especially from Syria. In
particular, the agreement involved amending the constitution
to allow for the election of Army Commander General Michel
Sleiman to the presidency without bypassing Prime Minister
Siniora's government which would play its constitutional
role in passing the amendment.
At the moment
he recanted on the agreement, Berri privately informed a few
concerned parties that the matter went beyond him as it
demanded a Saudi-Syrian agreement. Quite many are using the
terminology indicating that the crisis in Lebanon has
returned to square one as a result of the ongoing
presidential void despite the agreement of the majority and
opposition on General Sleiman as a president to-be. However,
returning to square actually lies in Berri returning to his
talk about the equation that he proposed toward the end of
2006. Back then, the impasse between the majority and the
opposition led to the resignation of the Shiite ministers,
blocking the ratification of the international tribunal in
parliament, and the sit-in held by the opposition in the
central district of Beirut. At that point, Berri proposed
what he called SS equation in reference to Saudi Arabia and
Syria.
Returning to
square one becomes more comprehensible if this is indeed
what the issue is about. By returning to his talk about the
SS formula, Berri is actually saying that he is helpless and
that he cannot take the blame for the current impasse
despite the fact that his opponents continue to insist on
his fundamental responsibility in finding a solution for the
deadlock. This is not to mention the persistent claim by
opposition leaders that Berri is delegated to negotiate with
the majority, and the fact that he occasionally speaks in
the name of the opposition.
The matter of
the fact for those following the puzzles of the Lebanese
crisis and its deliberate constitutional acrobatics, can no
longer distinguish when Speaker Berri is delegated to
negotiate with the majority. The leader of the National
Patriotic Movement, General Michel Aoun, for example,
announced yesterday that he has been authorized by the rest
of the opposition to negotiate. Earlier, Speaker Berri also
said that he was the voice of the opposition in response to
Walid Junblat's call to continue the negotiations with
Berri. Last Saturday, when Berri recanted on his agreement
with Hariri, he said that his ministers would not attend the
cabinet's session to amend the constitution, which was part
of the agreement with Hariri, and instead, he informed
several sides that a minister from Hezbollah would be
attending the cabinet's session, and on top of that, he
said, "talk to the party [Hezbollah]." Before that,
Hezbollah withdrew the delegation that it had granted to
Berri when it informed all sides, after informing the Syrian
leadership, that mediators should get General Aoun's
approval for any solution….
This pattern
has been repeated several times during the negotiations with
the French and the League of Arab States among others. The
bottom line is that Berri has no qualms about making it
clear to anyone who wishes to understand, that he has no
clout with his allies and that there is nothing that he can
do. Nor does he feel any discomfort appearing helpless on
the decision-making level when the time comes for
escalation. Yet, Berri is counting on the fact that the
majority will find no one other than him to make a
settlement with the opposition. General Aoun plays the
hardliner. Hezbollah, at the same time, abstains from
holding direct talks with other players, but assumes
leadership when the time comes for maneuvering and sends it
opponents to have dialogue with Aoun who then escalates,
then authorizes Berri to hold talks and then pulls the
delegation off his hands….
If this is the
game intended to effectively adapt to regional fluctuations,
the status quo in Lebanon then becomes a reflection of the
outcomes of this game. In effect, the ongoing situation in
Lebanon is a direct translation of the persisting grudge
between Saudi Arabia and Syria (SS). The former still ties
improving relations with Syria to Syria's ending its
blocking of the presidential elections and the void through
its allies in Lebanon as well as leading to a balanced
cabinet; the latter keeps the presidency as hostage and will
not let go of it until it achieves an agreement with Saudi
Arabia over a basket of issues on the regional and
international level. Damascus, based on what it has informed
King Abdullah II of Jordan, refuses to be questioned about
its role in Lebanon by a foreign side, especially an Arab,
because it considers Lebanon to be its vital sphere of
influence in which no outsiders are allowed to interfere,
and because Hezbollah represents an untouchable red line.
In this foggy
and dusty regional situation, may God have mercy on the
knight of the Lebanese army, General Francois Al-Hajj. |
