Exclusive - Lebanese Politicians Exploit Sectarianism to Preserve Power

People walk next to a poster of Lebanon's Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri. (Reuters)
People walk next to a poster of Lebanon's Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri. (Reuters)
TT

Exclusive - Lebanese Politicians Exploit Sectarianism to Preserve Power

People walk next to a poster of Lebanon's Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri. (Reuters)
People walk next to a poster of Lebanon's Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri. (Reuters)

Sectarianism controls all aspects of political life in Lebanon. It imposes itself on the scene, from the formation of the government to the appointment of employees.

Take the example of caretaker Education Minister Marwan Hamadeh, who sacked a Christian employee affiliated to the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM). Two FPM ministers retaliated by sacking two Druze officials from their jobs.

It is as if the politicians are seeking to legalize sectarianism and turn it into a commodity that grants its owners more privileges through introducing new norms, such as in the government formation process or the rights of sects in assuming certain ministerial portfolios.

Officials have no shame when it comes to sectarian rhetoric.

Lebanese Forces MP George Akis told Asharq Al-Awsat that politicians started to resort to such rhetoric after the 1989 Taif Accord left the Lebanese with an inconclusive political settlement.

The accord helped end the country’s 1975-90 civil war, but failed to cement the “no victor, no vanquished” formula in Lebanon, added the lawmaker.

Researcher at Information International Mohammed Shamseddine argued that sectarianism in Lebanon dates back to the 1930s.

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that “demographic concerns” imposed the sectarian reality on Lebanon.

Sectarianism has been legalized since 1936 through a decree issued by French High Commissioner Damien de Martel, who approved a sectarian system for Lebanon, he explained. His decree recognized ten Christian sects, five Islamic ones and an Israelite sect. The Christian Anglican sect was added to the system in 1950 and the Coptic one in 1996.

“This system promoted the independence of sects in terms of handling personal, education, medical and social affairs, thereby, forming states within the state,” he continued.

“The collapse and weakening of the state empowered the sects. Citizens felt greater belonging to the sect that they believed provided for their education and medical care,” Shamseddine added. The people felt more protected by their sect than their state.

Islamic studies professor at the Lebanese American University Hosn Abboud contrasted sectarian in Lebanon to other countries where the state provides for the people.

She noted Lebanese with dual nationalities obtain their rights through the second country they belong to, not Lebanon. These countries believe in free medical care and education. In return, the citizens pay taxes to the state, which provides them with services.

In Lebanon and due to the flaw in the political sectarian system, the people expect their sectarian leader to provide for them, she added.

Akis, meanwhile, remarked that the sectarian rhetoric in Lebanon had intensified in recent years because politicians are aware that tapping into the people’s sectarian sentiments was the easier way to rile them up. Adopting a tolerant approach is instead seen as a form of weakness.

The LF, he continued, resorts to sectarian rhetoric strictly to garner better Christian representation in power.

The LF represents a vast number of Christians in Lebanon. Such rhetoric is not a product of an isolationist policy, he stressed. On the contrary, the LF is open to its Arab environment and its moderate Sunni, Druze and Shiite colleagues in Lebanon.

Moreover, the lawmaker said that the LF’s alliances are not based on sectarian interests.

Akis added: “The weakness of politicians and inability to offer actual achievements to the people in regards to the establishment of a strong state, pushed them towards investing in the sectarian rhetoric.”

“Change can only come from the political class. It should come from the educated and cultured figures of all sects,” he went on to say. “This all takes time and should start from school curricula.”

Shamseddine, for his part, said that change can only take place when the majority of the Lebanese “grow hungry, but this will not happen any time soon.”

“The people will not move alone. They need someone to lead them from outside their own sect,” he explained. So far, no such figure has emerged.

A civil society movement that had risen in recent years turned out to only seek power, he lamented.

The solution to this bitter reality, said Akis, lies in the implementation of the constitution.

Its laws, he explained, limit sectarianism to parliamentary representation and the highest positions in the country.



UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
TT

UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)

In 2006, after a bruising monthlong war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah armed group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted for a resolution to end the conflict and pave the way for lasting security along the border.

But while relative calm stood for nearly two decades, Resolution 1701’s terms were never fully enforced.

Now, figuring out how to finally enforce it is key to a US-brokered deal that brought a ceasefire Wednesday.

In late September, after nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiraled into all-out war and an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets pound deep inside Lebanon and Hezbollah fires rockets deeper into northern Israel, UN and diplomatic officials again turned to the 2006 resolution in a bid to end the conflict.

Years of deeply divided politics and regionwide geopolitical hostilities have halted substantial progress on its implementation, yet the international community believes Resolution 1701 is still the brightest prospect for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.

Almost two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States led shuttle diplomacy efforts between Lebanon and Israel to agree on a ceasefire proposal that renewed commitment to the resolution, this time with an implementation plan to try to reinvigorate the document.

What is UNSC Resolution 1701? In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon along a UN-demarcated “Blue Line” that separated the two countries and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in Syria. UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeepers increased their presence along the line of withdrawal.

Resolution 1701 was supposed to complete Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure Hezbollah would move north of the Litani River, keeping the area exclusively under the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers.

Up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers would help to maintain calm, return displaced Lebanese and secure the area alongside the Lebanese military.

The goal was long-term security, with land borders eventually demarcated to resolve territorial disputes.

The resolution also reaffirmed previous ones that call for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon — Hezbollah among them.

“It was made for a certain situation and context,” Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Associated Press. “But as time goes on, the essence of the resolution begins to hollow.”

Has Resolution 1701 been implemented? For years, Lebanon and Israel blamed each other for countless violations along the tense frontier. Israel said Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and growing arsenal remained, and accused the group of using a local environmental organization to spy on troops.

Lebanon complained about Israeli military jets and naval ships entering Lebanese territory even when there was no active conflict.

“You had a role of the UNIFIL that slowly eroded like any other peacekeeping with time that has no clear mandate,” said Joseph Bahout, the director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They don’t have permission to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”

UNIFIL for years has urged Israel to withdraw from some territory north of the frontier, but to no avail. In the ongoing war, the peacekeeping mission has accused Israel, as well as Hezbollah, of obstructing and harming its forces and infrastructure.

Hezbollah’s power, meanwhile, has grown, both in its arsenal and as a political influence in the Lebanese state.

The Iran-backed group was essential in keeping Syrian President Bashar Assad in power when armed opposition groups tried to topple him, and it supports Iran-backed groups in Iraq and Yemen. It has an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided missiles pointed at Israel, and has introduced drones into its arsenal.

Hanna says Hezbollah “is something never seen before as a non-state actor” with political and military influence.

How do mediators hope to implement 1701 almost two decades later? Israel's security Cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office. The ceasefire began at 4 am local time Wednesday.

Efforts led by the US and France for the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah underscored that they still view the resolution as key. For almost a year, Washington has promoted various versions of a deal that would gradually lead to its full implementation.

International mediators hope that by boosting financial support for the Lebanese army — which was not a party in the Israel-Hezbollah war — Lebanon can deploy some 6,000 additional troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. Under the deal, an international monitoring committee headed by the United States would oversee implementation to ensure that Hezbollah and Israel’s withdrawals take place.

It is not entirely clear how the committee would work or how potential violations would be reported and dealt with.

The circumstances now are far more complicated than in 2006. Some are still skeptical of the resolution's viability given that the political realities and balance of power both regionally and within Lebanon have dramatically changed since then.

“You’re tying 1701 with a hundred things,” Bahout said. “A resolution is the reflection of a balance of power and political context.”

Now with the ceasefire in place, the hope is that Israel and Lebanon can begin negotiations to demarcate their land border and settle disputes over several points along the Blue Line for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.