The tourist industry in Lebanon is unhappy. According to the head of the country’s hoteliers’ association, the delay in forming a government has put $2-billion worth of investment in hotel development and 6,000 new jobs on hold. But there is a lot more at risk than new hotels. Lebanon’s precarious unity and stability could vanish if a coalition government does not emerge soon.
It is over two and a half months since the alliance led by Saad Hariri known as March 14 defeated the pro-Syrian alliance led by Hezbollah in the country’s general elections. Since then Hariri, as prime minister designate, has bent over backwards to bring all Lebanon’s political factions into his Cabinet.
Last week he said that Hezbollah would be included, ignoring warnings from the Israelis that they would hold his government responsible for any attacks on Israel by Hezbollah if that were the case. He has since indicated he plans equal numbers of Muslim and Christian ministers. His one no-go area is the opposition’s demand of a veto in government.
It is unreasonable given that it convincingly lost the election. He is sticking to the agreed formula which, while denying it a veto, ensures he does not have an absolute majority: 15 ministers from his alliance, 10 from the opposition and five appointed by President Michel Sleiman. It is a fair formula, given that March 14 won and the opposition lost; anywhere else the opposition would not be in government at all.
Despite these reconciliatory efforts, no government of national unity has emerged so far. On the contrary, there is increasing rancor.
It is cause for concern. It is impossible to ignore growing allegations that the opposition is out to sabotage the process. The excessive demands of Hezbollah’s principal ally, Michel Aoun — he wants five of the Christian ministers in the government to be from his Free Patriotic Movement plus the Interior Ministry for himself and his son-in-law to remain telecommunications minister — and his refusal to meet with Hariri unless the latter’s MPs apologized for perceived insults to him look like calculated sabotage. No one, genuinely interested in Lebanon’s future could be that self-centered. Moreover, claims by March 14 coordinator Fares Soaid that Aoun is play acting on Hezbollah’s behalf, to give the impression that the delays are purely Lebanese rather than directed from outside, inevitably begin to look credible the longer the deadlock lasts.
Despite Hezbollah’s statement that it wants to join a unity government, questions remain over its real agenda. It has denied allegations of arming extremists in the northern city of Tripoli but it has threatened to bring violence to the country if the international tribunal on Rafik Hariri’s assassination in The Hague dares implicate it. Such threats throw into doubt its commitment to Lebanese peace, other than on its terms.
It is not difficult to imagine others outside Lebanon intent on derailing Hariri’s plans. The Israelis would certainly like to do so, and they are not the only ones. The political confusion has not been improved by the decision of Druze leader Walid Jumblatt to pull out of the March 14 alliance and realign with Damascus, though not with Hezbollah or Aoun.
The situation is worrying. A government is desperately needed, if only to address Lebanon’s’ grave economic and social issues. The longer the delay, the greater the chance of failure — and of recriminations turning violent.
