It seems clear that the odds of Haret Hreik and Paris’ candidate being elected are lower than they have ever been. None of the domestic players, most notably among the local Christian forces, have walked back on their opposition to the Shiite Duo’s candidate, Sulieman Franjieh. And four of the five global actors following the situation in Lebanon, the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, and France (the only exception), remain determined to avoid playing the naming game.
These countries have maintained their commitment to their criteria for supporting a candidate. They are still determined to see the election of the reformist candidate that Lebanon needs to carve a way out of its economic and social, as well as political, crises. However, the fact that they have not budged has not pushed the parties supporting Franjieh to concede yet. Instead, they have made it clear that they will fight this battle to the end, as demonstrated by the recent statements of the leader of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, Mohammed Raad.
Deputy Raad laid out Hezbollah’s criteria and benchmarks bluntly. "It may take a long time for them to understand the truth. However, this is their concern, as the presidential election is tied to paving the strategic path that Lebanon will take." He added: "There can be no laxity in choosing the person who represents a guarantee for our security, sovereignty, and interests. A candidate who does not take orders from our enemies on the phone, that is what we are patiently striving for."
In essence, Raad has reverted back to conspiratorial rhetoric and painted his rivals as traitors. He spoke of what he called projects for the domination of the region launched from Lebanon, winking at the 2019 October 17 uprising, and presenting his intransigence as a punishment for their actions that manifests- as he put it of course- the steadfastness of the people he represents.
Meanwhile, the press has reported that Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri insists on his candidate, even after all of the domestic and international demands that a compromise figure be agreed upon. By digging their heels in, Berri and Raad have affirmed that the ruling clique has little appetite for reversing its position in what it considers a pivotal matter and is preparing for a bone breaking battle.
The ruling clique clinging to its candidate so strongly, despite the broadening obstacles undermining his prospects, shows the gravity of the crisis it would face if it fails to impose a president from among its ranks on the Lebanese. This is the first time that this clique faces the risk of losing a member, including prominent ones, since it came to rule the country after the end of the civil war and took control of the state and its institutions. This is the first time it is threatened with losing its privileges within state institutions, and this is the first presidential election that could put its political future and its ability to draw future support in jeopardy.
This clique does not relinquish its gains. Regardless of how severe the tragedy of the Lebanese people becomes, it will not settle on a unifying nationally agreed upon candidate rather than one who represents its narrow partisan or sectarian interests. It will do everything it can to protect every member. Though they may quarrel amongst themselves, all members know that allowing any one of them to fall would leave the others following him like dominos. It would spell the beginning of the end of its grip over the state.
Moreover, this clique, by insisting on the imposition of its representatives in every leadership position and ministry, is also impeding the rise of a new political class that is not linked to the memory of the civil war and sectarian conflicts and can breathe new life into Lebanese politics.
And so, no outsider can be allowed to ascend to key positions. This is a question of life and death. These are people who came to power through a civil war, and they will not give it up because of the ballot box.
