The protracted presidential vacuum in Lebanon, following the expiration of Michel Aoun’s term in October 2022, underscores the intricate and often debilitating nature of the country’s political system. This vacancy, persisting even after parliamentary elections, has left Lebanon rudderless amidst a deep financial crisis and a recent war between Israel and Hezbollah. The core issue lies in the religiously-based power-sharing system, a legacy of French colonial rule, which mandates that the president be Maronite Christian, the prime minister Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of parliament Shia Muslim. This system, while intended to ensure representation, often leads to political deadlock, as evidenced by the current stalemate. Exacerbating the situation is the fact that Aoun dissolved the government before leaving office, leaving Lebanon under the precarious leadership of a caretaker government with limited authority.
The Lebanese parliament, responsible for electing the president, is deeply fractured along sectarian lines, mirroring the broader political landscape. Hezbollah, a powerful Shia political party and militant group, and its ally, the Amal Movement, have played a significant role in obstructing the election process. Their resistance to compromise candidates has effectively paralyzed the presidential selection. This political maneuvering takes place against the backdrop of a nation grappling with severe economic hardship and the aftermath of a devastating conflict. International pressure has mounted on Lebanon to resolve the presidential impasse, with several key international actors advocating for specific candidates.
The recent ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah has created a window of opportunity for progress. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri called for a presidential vote, signaling a potential shift in the political landscape. General Joseph Aoun has emerged as a leading contender, garnering significant international support. However, his candidacy is complicated by constitutional requirements that prohibit individuals holding high office, including generals, from assuming the presidency within two years of leaving their post. Overcoming this hurdle would require a constitutional amendment, a process that, while not insurmountable, adds another layer of complexity to the already convoluted situation.
One of the primary obstacles to Joseph Aoun’s candidacy is Samir Geagea, leader of the Lebanese Forces party. Geagea, who had initially nominated Aoun before declaring his own candidacy, represents a competing faction within the Christian political sphere. Hezbollah has vetoed Geagea, citing his past as a warlord during the Lebanese Civil War. Interestingly, Hezbollah has signaled a willingness to accept Joseph Aoun, despite his not being related to the former president. This shift suggests a potential realignment of political alliances and a possible pathway towards resolving the presidential deadlock. However, the path forward remains fraught with challenges, as political maneuvering and calculations continue to shape the landscape.
The stance of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri remains a critical factor in the presidential election. Berri has publicly expressed reservations about circumventing the constitutional requirement regarding recent officeholders, despite having previously supported a candidate who violated similar regulations in the 2008 election. This apparent contradiction highlights the fluidity of political alliances and the pragmatic nature of political maneuvering in Lebanon. Berri’s position is pivotal, as his support, or lack thereof, could significantly influence the outcome of the vote. His ultimate decision could either facilitate the election of Joseph Aoun or further prolong the presidential vacuum.
The complexities of the Lebanese presidential election are further underscored by the intricate voting procedures. A candidate requires a two-thirds majority, or at least 86 votes out of 128, in the first round of voting. If no candidate achieves this threshold, a second round is held, requiring a simple majority of 65 votes. Previous attempts to elect a president have been hampered by low parliamentary attendance, preventing the necessary quorum for a vote. This procedural hurdle adds another layer of difficulty to an already challenging political process, highlighting the deep divisions and the difficulty of achieving consensus in Lebanon’s fragmented political landscape. The ongoing presidential vacuum underscores the fragility of Lebanon’s political system and its vulnerability to internal and external pressures.
