عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Lebanese Officials Begin Mulling Names of Presidential Candidates

This aerial view shows activists and relatives of the 2020 Beirut port blast victims spreading a giant national flag, as they march in the Lebanese capital's port area on August 4, 2022, on the day that crisis-hit country marks two years since a giant explosion ripped through the capital. (AFP)
This aerial view shows activists and relatives of the 2020 Beirut port blast victims spreading a giant national flag, as they march in the Lebanese capital's port area on August 4, 2022, on the day that crisis-hit country marks two years since a giant explosion ripped through the capital. (AFP)
TT
20
TT

Lebanese Officials Begin Mulling Names of Presidential Candidates

This aerial view shows activists and relatives of the 2020 Beirut port blast victims spreading a giant national flag, as they march in the Lebanese capital's port area on August 4, 2022, on the day that crisis-hit country marks two years since a giant explosion ripped through the capital. (AFP)
This aerial view shows activists and relatives of the 2020 Beirut port blast victims spreading a giant national flag, as they march in the Lebanese capital's port area on August 4, 2022, on the day that crisis-hit country marks two years since a giant explosion ripped through the capital. (AFP)

Lebanese political blocs have kicked off “cautious” efforts to discuss potential presidential candidates to succeed Michel Aoun, whose term ends in around 80 days.

In general terms, the president is expected to be “open” to all parties and blocs, enjoy “internal political consensus”, and be able to address the international community and put Lebanon “on the right track to recovery”.

The presidential election needs the attendance of two thirds of the 128-member parliament to meet the desired quorum. A candidate is declared a winner after reaping over two thirds of votes in the first round.

This usually demands agreements between various political blocs, rivals and allies alike. Discussions to reach such agreements started about a month ago.

MPs of the civilian protest movement for change have in recent weeks discussed the characteristics of potential candidates without delving into names, said sources monitoring the discussions.

Some of the 13 Change lawmakers are in contact with opposition political forces and others to garner their views and attempt to reach possible understandings over the elections, the sources told Asharq Al-Awsat.

The Change MPs are in agreement with traditional political forces over some issues and disagreement over others, namely that the president must not be a partisan or military figure.

The latter position clashes with the Lebanese Forces that supports the nomination of army commander Joseph Aoun if consensus is reached over him.

Some Change MPs agree with the LF, Kataeb and Progressive Socialist Party over a candidate who is “sovereign” - meaning a figure not affiliated with Iran - and supports the independence of the judiciary, which they view as the foundation of any state seeking transparency and accountability and that wants to combat corruption.

They are also aspiring for a president who would approve the financial and economic recovery plan.

The Change MPs have stressed their openness to all non-partisan figures.

Change MP Ibrahim Mneimneh told Asharq Al-Awsat that the discussions have not been completed yet.

He said he wants the election of a president who will pursue reform and has a political and economic vision that “gives hope to the people.”

The president must be a centrist who is not affiliated with any of the regional powers, he added.

“He must be solely loyal to Lebanon,” he underlined. He must also enjoy international relations and be accepted by the international community so that he can mend Lebanon’s ties with Arab and friendly nations that have been damaged in recent years.

On the reluctance to nominate a military figure, Mneimneh explained that the Change MPs prefer for the military to be separated from politics.

“We prefer for the president to be a civilian,” he remarked.

“We are hoping to be united in nominating a president,” he said in wake of the division that emerged among the Change MPs in naming a prime minister in recent months.

As the debate over the presidential nominations gains steam among the LF, Kataeb and other blocs, Hezbollah has notably remained silent.

The Iran-backed party has yet to throw its support behind a candidate in spite of its alliance with the Free Patriotic Movement, which is headed by MP Gebran Bassil and whose founder is President Aoun, and close ties with head of the Marada movement, Suleiman Franjieh, a potential candidate.

The traditional parties each seemingly have their own characteristics of what a candidate should be like.

The LF believes its leader Samir Geagea to be a shoe-in for president and does not want a candidate from the March 8 camp to be elected.

The Marada movement believes a candidate must be a consensual figure. The Shiite Amal movement, of parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, believes the president must respect Islamic, Christian and national views. This position is in line with former prime minister Fuad Siniora, who believes that the presidential elections is not a strictly Christian affair.

The FPM, meanwhile, believes that the president must enjoy popular representation, reflecting “the political national will expressed by the people in the parliamentary elections.”

“What’s the point of democracy, elections and political work if the concept of respecting popular representation is ignored?” says the movement.

Most Viewed

 
Features

Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
TT
20
TT

Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP

By casting doubt on the world order, Donald Trump risks dragging the globe back into an era where great powers impose their imperial will on the weak, analysts warn.
Russia wants Ukraine, China demands Taiwan and now the US president seems to be following suit, whether by coveting Canada as the "51st US state", insisting "we've got to have" Greenland or kicking Chinese interests out of the Panama Canal.
Where the United States once defended state sovereignty and international law, Trump's disregard for his neighbors' borders and expansionist ambitions mark a return to the days when the world was carved up into spheres of influence.
As recently as Wednesday, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth floated the idea of an American military base to secure the Panama Canal, a strategic waterway controlled by the United States until 1999 which Trump's administration has vowed to "take back".
Hegseth's comments came nearly 35 years after the United States invaded to topple Panama's dictator Manuel Noriega, harking back to when successive US administrations viewed Latin America as "America's backyard".
"The Trump 2.0 administration is largely accepting the familiar great power claim to 'spheres of influence'," Professor Gregory O. Hall, of the University of Kentucky, told AFP.
Indian diplomat Jawed Ashraf warned that by "speaking openly about Greenland, Canada, Panama Canal", "the new administration may have accelerated the slide" towards a return to great power domination.
The empire strikes back
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has posed as the custodian of an international order "based on the ideas of countries' equal sovereignty and territorial integrity", said American researcher Jeffrey Mankoff, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But those principles run counter to how Russia and China see their own interests, according to the author of "Empires of Eurasia: how imperial legacies shape international security".
Both countries are "themselves products of empires and continue to function in many ways like empires", seeking to throw their weight around for reasons of prestige, power or protection, Mankoff said.
That is not to say that spheres of influence disappeared with the fall of the Soviet Union.
"Even then, the US and Western allies sought to expand their sphere of influence eastward into what was the erstwhile Soviet and then the Russian sphere of influence," Ashraf, a former adviser to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, pointed out.
But until the return of Trump, the United States exploited its position as the "policeman of the world" to ward off imperial ambitions while pushing its own interests.
Now that Trump appears to view the cost of upholding a rules-based order challenged by its rivals and increasingly criticized in the rest of the world as too expensive, the United States is contributing to the cracks in the facade with Russia and China's help.
And as the international order weakens, the great powers "see opportunities to once again behave in an imperial way", said Mankoff.
Yalta yet again
As at Yalta in 1945, when the United States and the Soviet Union divided the post-World War II world between their respective zones of influence, Washington, Beijing and Moscow could again agree to carve up the globe anew.
"Improved ties between the United States and its great-power rivals, Russia and China, appear to be imminent," Derek Grossman, of the United States' RAND Corporation think tank, said in March.
But the haggling over who gets dominance over what and where would likely come at the expense of other countries.
"Today's major powers are seeking to negotiate a new global order primarily with each other," Monica Toft, professor of international relations at Tufts University in Massachusets wrote in the journal Foreign Affairs.
"In a scenario in which the United States, China, and Russia all agree that they have a vital interest in avoiding a nuclear war, acknowledging each other's spheres of influence can serve as a mechanism to deter escalation," Toft said.
If that were the case, "negotiations to end the war in Ukraine could resemble a new Yalta", she added.
Yet the thought of a Ukraine deemed by Trump to be in Russia's sphere is likely to send shivers down the spines of many in Europe -- not least in Ukraine itself.
"The success or failure of Ukraine to defend its sovereignty is going to have a lot of impact in terms of what the global system ends up looking like a generation from now," Mankoff said.
"So it's important for countries that have the ability and want to uphold an anti-imperial version of international order to assist Ukraine," he added -- pointing the finger at Europe.
"In Trump's world, Europeans need their own sphere of influence," said Rym Momtaz, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace.
"For former imperial powers, Europeans seem strangely on the backfoot as nineteenth century spheres of influence come back as the organising principle of global affairs."