The time is right to take another look at the empty slogans.

Friday, Aug 21 2009

The days and weeks are passing while plans to form the new government remain frozen and threaten to turn into a governmental crisis. Meanwhile, the Lebanese people, who have been living through all these crises, are fearful that this delay is intentional and is aimed at maintaining the status quo which has been in place since 2005 under a caretaker government. The people also fear that they are facing the same crises repeatedly while their fate remains attached to waiting to see what the regional and international developments bring, and consequently, keeping Lebanon in conflict or even bringing about an internal collapse.

President Suleiman has spent his first year in office working on external relations, which he has really improved, and in resuming better relations with Syria which opened its first embassy in Beirut during his presidency. In internal affairs, the president has brought his power to bear upon liaising between the conflicting political powers in the lead-up to the parliamentary elections which saw extreme confessional, sectarian and neighbourhood divisions being played out on the streets. During all this, the President remained neutral and firm. He has also shown himself to be an effective commander of the Lebanese army, establishing security particularly given that the country was on the brink of civil conflict on numerous occasions, divided and lost in the hands of politicians who would show it no mercy!

The President wants to set the country on a new course. This contributed to the positive political turn-around by the leader of the Democratic group, Mr. Walid Jumblatt, which paved the way for a bloc in parliament supportive of the President as well as support within the government. It is clear that this first post-elections government upon which President Suleiman relies so much – we may remember that the Lebanese people witnessed the farce of the national unity government and other such governments – raises high expectations as people need it to find answers to the various issues whether economic, health related, social, security, developmental or relating to the general debt. Most importantly, this government is called upon to atone for the sins of its predecessors and to pass an electoral law which has the confidence of the people and which will place a limit on sectarianism which is the source of Lebanon's various ills. Indeed, the current electoral law which was used in the recent elections is the main reason for what is happening today relating to the formation of the government.

Are there any real internal reasons for the continued procrastination and delay in the formation of a national unity government, or a coalition government as some prefer to call it, particularly given the political repositioning of Mr. Jumblatt and the discovery that all the Lebanese people want a government aligned with national interests rather than with personal interests?

Economic challenges lie behind the appointment of the leader of the Future Movement, Mr. Saad Hariri, as designate to create the new government following the elections. This is a young man who is new to politics and is his father's heir – that's the simple truth. As such, he is required to translate the slogans which aspire to improve the lot of the Lebanese citizen after four years of instability whether relating to the standard of living, social ills or healthcare issues. If he is silent, how will his silence be interpreted?

The opportunity is now ripe for Saad Hariri to take another look at the empty slogans which brought the country to the brink of civil war. He needs to return to a more centre moderate position in the manner of his late father. The way is also open for equal relations with Syria and to embrace the resistance in the face of the Israeli threat. So why the hesitation and the insistence on following a path which has shown itself to be failure over the past four years? This path is also alien to the traditions and heritage of the Lebanese people in particular the Sunnis. We thus feel that it would be wise for Saad Hariri to follow the example of his late father who did so much for development for the sake of the country's unity and its people.

We would advise Saad Hariri, in his role as PM designate appointed to the task of forming the government, not to hesitate in going to Syria. We also urge him to review his stances which almost took the country to civil war, particularly amongst the Sunnis, and to follow in the steps of his late father who believed in the Taef accord regarding brotherly relations between all the Arab countries. He needs to establish excellent relations between Lebanon and Syria – relations rooted in closeness, history and shared interests, which would be based on cooperation between both countries and would be favourable to the sovereignty and independence of both.

We are hearing superficial and ridiculous talk of some people surrounding Mr. Hariri and from those of his allies left from the 14 March group who are waging a campaign against the leader of the Coalition for Change and Conciliation, General Aoun, accusing him of being an obstructionist. This is strange particularly given that the leader of the Future Movement had, prior to his turn-around, worked with them. Saad Hariri stopped the consultations and changed his stance for reasons which have become clear to the Lebanese people after the 14 March group lost its most important elements. And so, is there any need for the man charged with forming the government to take all this time in achieving this task?

There are concerns surrounding the atmosphere of the deliberations relating to the formation of the government. These have shown themselves to be attempts to repeat an old game aimed at reigniting sectarian tensions, this time under the banner of defending international resolutions from the resistance and its weapons. It is clear that strengthening the role of the resistance is a national duty as long as the Shebaa farms remain under occupation and as long as there are still blatant threats and continuous violations from Israel. The experiences of the past four years must serve as a lesson on the failure of the various political powers and individuals who took this path. The proof of this lies in the fact that most of the political power publicly stated that the weapons of the resistance are necessary and that a defensive strategy is key at the negotiating table after the completion of the formation of the government and its ministerial statement.

In short, what is required is the formation of the government and the publication of a ministerial statement which will address the complaints of the Lebanese people ranging from unemployment to deprivation and the lack of opportunities and quotas. This needs to be done through a real reconsideration of the process of state-building through reform and development which reaches into all institutions and areas and puts a limit on the policies of waste and quotas. The irony is that everyone in the country is suffering from economic and developmental problems and the burden of the general debt and meeting its payments.

The Lebanese people need to wait for the smoke to clear in the region. The work involved in dealing with the various Middle Eastern issues creates hesitation in the regional situation and its crises, whether relating to dialogue between Tehran and Washington or general Western talks primarily between Syria and the USA, as well as the possibility of resuming Syrian-Israeli talks and American pressure on Benyamin Netanyahu with particular reference to stopping the building of settlements in the occupied West Bank as a prelude to the resumption of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. This path seems pointless and we expect the results of the US envoy George Mitchell to be negligible. However, all of this leads us once again to state that the policy of procrastination and waiting while the responsibilities relating to the standard of living, economy, education and the institutions are ignored in the hope that time will solve them will draw a heavy price from Lebanon both from its wealth and its people. This has placed our country on the brink of bankruptcy and led to increased youth immigration. So where will our national capabilities and institutions be; indeed, what remains of our independence and freedom is in certain danger if the Lebanese people remain at the mercy of so-called 'experts' in the policy of waiting and procrastination and looking to the outside world?