Lebanon 'Tackles' Presidential Vacuum...with Army Generals

LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun (LAF website)
LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun (LAF website)
TT

Lebanon 'Tackles' Presidential Vacuum...with Army Generals

LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun (LAF website)
LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun (LAF website)

As Lebanon’s political blocs have failed to elect a new president for the country, all attention turns, as usual, to the military institution, which enjoys the people’s trust as the most cohesive authority within the Lebanese state.

In addition to MP Michel Moawad, two candidates share the electoral stage; but no party has endorsed their candidacy. Those are former MP Sleiman Franjieh, and Army Commander General Joseph Aoun. The latter’s chances are rising with the faltering elections, especially since he also enjoys international confidence that was expressed on more than one occasion.

The Army tends to disregard talks about the candidacy of its commander and refrains from making public statements about it.

A security source told Asharq Al-Awsat that the commander’s directives were firm in this regard.

“His main concern today is to spare the institution the catastrophic repercussions of the crises that afflict the country; he is not envisaging political work,” the source remarked.

Asharq Al-Awsat presents an extensive investigation, based on the experience of four Army generals - Fouad Chehab, Emile Lahoud, Michel Sleiman, and Michel Aoun - who assumed the Lebanese presidency.

All of the four generals were elected as a result of consensus and the inability of politicians to propose solutions to the crises that afflict the country. Paradoxically, the tenure of each of them witnessed a change in the international and regional balance of power that further scattered the country’s torn papers.

Fouad Chehab: The era of institutions... and intelligence services

General Fouad Chehab played two pivotal roles in the two biggest crises that afflicted Lebanon. The first was the resignation of President Bechara El-Khoury in 1952 under the pressure of massive demonstrations against his internal policies, and apparently, his endeavor to renew his mandate after amending the constitution.

The second crisis was represented in the events of the so-called 1958 revolution at the end of the term of President Camille Chamoun, who sided with the policies of the West in contrast to the policies of Egyptian President Abdel Nasser, who was overwhelmingly popular among Muslims in Lebanon.

In the first crisis, Chehab was appointed head of a transitional government for three days, which oversaw the transfer of power between the resignation of Khoury and the election of Chamoun. In the second, the army stood neutral between the two parties to the conflict and prevented supporters of the opposition and the government alike from occupying strategic sites such as airports, radio stations, and government buildings.

Although Fouad Chehab rejected the temptation to run for the presidency in 1952, he accepted that in 1958.

His tenure was known as “the era of institutions,” but was also marked by the strong involvement of the Army Intelligence - known at the time as the Second Bureau - in political life, as well as in administrations and civil societies.

Renowned Author Emile Khoury described Chehab’s rule as the “era of stability and reforms.”

Emile Lahoud... A failed reproduction of Chehab’s Experience

With the end of President Elias Hrawi’s term in 1995, Army Commander General Emile Lahoud was the preferred candidate for Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, who at that time had the last say in the appointment of senior positions in the country.

However, external pressure and wishes made Assad postpone this election, and accept the extension of Hrawi’s term for an additional three years, after which Lahoud would be elected as president in 1998 after amending the constitution for this purpose.

Lahoud’s tenure saw a decline in the power of the Syrian regime in Lebanon. Moreover, Assad’s support for amending the constitution to extend Lahoud’s term for an additional three years resulted in the latter’s international isolation, especially since it occurred before the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and the great upheaval that followed.

Former Minister Karim Pakradouni, who was a supporter of Lahoud’s election, says: “There is a rule in Lebanon: every time politicians fail to agree on a candidate’s name, they resort to the army. This is what happened in 1958 when differences prevailed between political and sectarian forces… This also happened when they elected General Emile Lahoud as president…”

Pakradouni continued: “In this context, President Lahoud summed up the policies of his era with ‘liberation, alliance with Syria, and reform’. Lahoud succeeded in achieving liberation, as the land was liberated from the Israelis in 2000, and he was able to ally with Syria, but he did not succeed in the issue of reform, knowing that much was expected of him in reforms…”

The Era of Michel Sleiman… The Golden Trio turns into Intense Rivalry

President Michel Sleiman assumed the presidency following a compromise between the parties to the conflict at the end of Lahoud’s term, and after a presidential vacuum that lasted for nearly six months. Sleiman was a consensual president produced by agreements in Doha in the aftermath of a military operation carried out by Hezbollah against its political opponents in Beirut and the Mountains in May 2008.

Alike his military predecessors, he faced changes in the international equation, with the outbreak of the Arab Spring uprisings and their arrival in Syria with the direct involvement of Hezbollah.

The “honeymoon” with the party did not last long, and talk of the “Army, People and Resistance,” which was adopted in the ministerial statement during his tenure, turned into intense rivalry with Sleiman, to the extent that his supporters described this slogan as the “wooden trio”, ridiculing Hezbollah’s description of it as the “golden trio.”

Former Minister Nazim al-Khoury, who was close to Sleiman, considers him “a national figure who succeeded in playing the role of arbitrator between the political parties. His election came as a realistic solution to a crisis that almost brought the country back to civil war.”

Khoury noted that Sleiman’s main accomplishments included his success in managing the national dialogue and achieving consensus on the famous Baabda Declaration, which was considered a complement to the Taif Document and the Doha Agreement, and later became an official document approved by the United Nations and the League of Arab States.

Sleiman wanted the declaration to be a pre-emptive Lebanese agreement that would fortify it internally. Unfortunately, Iran entered the war line in Syria, which made Hezbollah retract its support for the Baabda Declaration and directly engage in the Syrian conflict.

Michel Aoun… The Era of Crises

Michel Sleiman’s term ended in a new presidential vacuum. The March 14 team had the necessary parliamentary majority to elect the president (about 70 deputies). However, the opposite team disrupted parliament sessions and prevented voting for two years and five months, after which a settlement was reached to elect General Michel Aoun, provided that MP Saad Hariri assumes the premiership.

This experiment has drastically failed. Lebanon suffered a relapse in the middle of the mandate, with a new international and regional change, accompanied this time by a financial and economic collapse, the greatest in the country’s history.

Aoun could not rule. Hezbollah, which closed Parliament to secure the election of its ally, “did not help him succeed,” says a senior official in the pro-Aoun movement.

MP Alain Aoun, the former president’s nephew and a member of his parliamentary bloc, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “President Aoun’s experience was not up to his ambitions or the aspirations of his supporters because of the financial collapse that occurred during his tenure…”

“This setback, despite its magnitude, cannot abolish the positive accomplishments during the era of President Aoun, in terms of the return of security and political stability in the first half of his tenure, thanks to the understandings that existed at the time, and the electoral reform that saw the adoption of the proportional system for the first time in the history of Lebanon, and finally and most importantly, the agreement on the maritime border demarcation with Israel,” the deputy said.



Legal Threats Close in on Israel's Netanyahu, Could Impact Ongoing Wars

The International Criminal Court (ICC) building is pictured on November 21, 2024 in The Hague. (Photo by Laurens van PUTTEN / ANP / AFP) / Netherlands OUT
The International Criminal Court (ICC) building is pictured on November 21, 2024 in The Hague. (Photo by Laurens van PUTTEN / ANP / AFP) / Netherlands OUT
TT

Legal Threats Close in on Israel's Netanyahu, Could Impact Ongoing Wars

The International Criminal Court (ICC) building is pictured on November 21, 2024 in The Hague. (Photo by Laurens van PUTTEN / ANP / AFP) / Netherlands OUT
The International Criminal Court (ICC) building is pictured on November 21, 2024 in The Hague. (Photo by Laurens van PUTTEN / ANP / AFP) / Netherlands OUT

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces legal perils at home and abroad that point to a turbulent future for the Israeli leader and could influence the wars in Gaza and Lebanon, analysts and officials say.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) stunned Israel on Thursday by issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense chief Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the 13-month-old Gaza conflict. The bombshell came less than two weeks before Netanyahu is due to testify in a corruption trial that has dogged him for years and could end his political career if he is found guilty. He has denied any wrongdoing. While the domestic bribery trial has polarized public opinion, the prime minister has received widespread support from across the political spectrum following the ICC move, giving him a boost in troubled times.
Netanyahu has denounced the court's decision as antisemitic and denied charges that he and Gallant targeted Gazan civilians and deliberately starved them.
"Israelis get really annoyed if they think the world is against them and rally around their leader, even if he has faced a lot of criticism," said Yonatan Freeman, an international relations expert at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
"So anyone expecting that the ICC ruling will end this government, and what they see as a flawed (war) policy, is going to get the opposite," he added.
A senior diplomat said one initial consequence was that Israel might be less likely to reach a rapid ceasefire with Hezbollah in Lebanon or secure a deal to bring back hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza.
"This terrible decision has ... badly harmed the chances of a deal in Lebanon and future negotiations on the issue of the hostages," said Ofir Akunis, Israel's consul general in New York.
"Terrible damage has been done because these organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas ... have received backing from the ICC and thus they are likely to make the price higher because they have the support of the ICC," he told Reuters.
While Hamas welcomed the ICC decision, there has been no indication that either it or Hezbollah see this as a chance to put pressure on Israel, which has inflicted huge losses on both groups over the past year, as well as on civilian populations.
IN THE DOCK
The ICC warrants highlight the disconnect between the way the war is viewed here and how it is seen by many abroad, with Israelis focused on their own losses and convinced the nation's army has sought to minimize civilian casualties.
Michael Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, said the ICC move would likely harden resolve and give the war cabinet license to hit Gaza and Lebanon harder still.
"There's a strong strand of Israeli feeling that runs deep, which says 'if we're being condemned for what we are doing, we might just as well go full gas'," he told Reuters.
While Netanyahu has received wide support at home over the ICC action, the same is not true of the domestic graft case, where he is accused of bribery, breach of trust and fraud.
The trial opened in 2020 and Netanyahu is finally scheduled to take the stand next month after the court rejected his latest request to delay testimony on the grounds that he had been too busy overseeing the war to prepare his defense.
He was due to give evidence last year but the date was put back because of the war. His critics have accused him of prolonging the Gaza conflict to delay judgment day and remain in power, which he denies. Always a divisive figure in Israel, public trust in Netanyahu fell sharply in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas assault on southern Israel that caught his government off guard, cost around 1,200 lives.
Israel's subsequent campaign has killed more than 44,000 people and displaced nearly all Gaza's population at least once, triggering a humanitarian catastrophe, according to Gaza officials.
The prime minister has refused advice from the state attorney general to set up an independent commission into what went wrong and Israel's subsequent conduct of the war.
He is instead looking to establish an inquiry made up only of politicians, which critics say would not provide the sort of accountability demanded by the ICC.
Popular Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth said the failure to order an independent investigation had prodded the ICC into action. "Netanyahu preferred to take the risk of arrest warrants, just as long as he did not have to form such a commission," it wrote on Friday.
ARREST THREAT
The prime minister faces a difficult future living under the shadow of an ICC warrant, joining the ranks of only a few leaders to have suffered similar humiliation, including Libya's Muammar Gaddafi and Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic.
It also means he risks arrest if he travels to any of the court's 124 signatory states, including most of Europe.
One place he can safely visit is the United States, which is not a member of the ICC, and Israeli leaders hope US President-elect Donald Trump will bring pressure to bear by imposing sanctions on ICC officials.
Mike Waltz, Trump's nominee for national security advisor, has already promised tough action: "You can expect a strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC & UN come January,” he wrote on X on Friday. In the meantime, Israeli officials are talking to their counterparts in Western capitals, urging them to ignore the arrest warrants, as Hungary has already promised to do.
However, the charges are not going to disappear soon, if at all, meaning fellow leaders will be increasingly reluctant to have relations with Netanyahu, said Yuval Shany, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute.
"In a very direct sense, there is going to be more isolation for the Israeli state going forward," he told Reuters.