The Saudi-Syrian Summit:Will this bear any fruit?

Friday, Oct 16 2009

We are hoping for a positive outcome from the Saudi-Syrian summit convened last week in Damascus between the Saudi monarch, King Abdullah, and the Syrian president, Bashar Al Asad. This summit came at a difficult time of inter-Arab divisions which opened the way for the regional and international powers to fill the void left by the absence of a concerted Arab effort. We believe in the importance of concerted Arab effort across the Arab world in general, and we feel that Lebanon will stand to benefit the most from any Arab cooperation, as will the influential Arab countries – and hopefully Egypt will join them. Such Arab understanding has had positive effects on Lebanon since the Taef accord and even before this agreement which placed a limit on the civil war which started in 1975. This was particularly the case after Saudi Arabia became a key contributor in the Taef accord and the subsequent Saudi work which affected the fate of the Lebanese governments which followed this agreement, dominated by the Prime Minister-ship of the late Rafik Hariri in most of the post-Taef governments. And so, the Lebanese people are looking to the Damascus summit as a sign of a breakthrough in terms of the crisis in forming the next government.

If one of the most important results of the Damascus summit is that it emphasizes the necessity of a national unity government, this summit will have put the ball back in Lebanon's court, and in particular to the PM designate appointed with the formation of the government, Saad Hariri. How so? The two leaders, King Abdullah and President Asad, while supporting the formation of a national unity government and calling for the formation of a government for the Lebanese people, have shown that the direct responsibility for the crisis of the delay lies squarely on the shoulders of the PM designate Saad Hariri, as he is the one who led both the first and second attempts, and it is he who will be responsible for the loss of the opportunity for recreating the feeling of inter-Arab cooperation which was created by the historical summit in Damascus.

We are facing a real problem, economic, financial and social, and we cannot distance our country from the effects of this by closing our eyes and ears. The fears of exacerbating these effects will show with the passing of days. And what of the recent report of the International Monetary Fund ignored by those responsible in Lebanon for the depth of the crisis. This report which was issued two days ago by the the Middle East and Central Asia Board of the International Monetary Fund included Lebanon in the category of countries threatened by economic slowdown in the coming year. This is what is expected by most institutions, particularly the IMF and the World Bank, both of which were involved in various previous reports which considered that the the rate of growth at 7% this year would drop to less than 4.5% next year. One of the repercussions of the crisis is the halting of the contributions which remain from Paris 3 for Lebanon, worth some $5.2 billion. This has surely evaporated in the shadow of the international financial crisis. We need to consider that some donor countries entered into a liquidity crisis to cover up major losses in their financial sectors; also, the governments of these countries needed to support their banking and financial institutions, particularly given that the donor countries, industrialized nations and the Arab states have mortgaged part of these funds and contributions for operations for Lebanese reform. And so, the state will have to borrow from the banking sector to finance the $3 billion budget deficit for 2009, and God knows how much it will be for 2010. The current fear is the declining investment in the financing of large projects in Lebanon, in the knowledge that the victims are predominantly poor and low-income elements of society. Is it acceptable to be satisfied with the banking sector as a pillar for the national economy? Is there any governmental intention – if there is indeed a government – to give priority to balanced development? Is there any plan to revitalize the production sectors, to reduce imports and to find employment opportunities for the youth? Will Lebanon remain without a government in the shadow of the global financial crisis and its effects on the region? Indeed, its negative effects have started to show in Lebanon with the loss of thousands of Lebanese young people to employment in the Gulf states and elsewhere. The Arab funds and financial institutions as well as wealthy Arab individuals in the sectors of investment in mortgages and diverse financial instruments related to the crisis are estimated at more than $250-300 billion.

The crux of the problem is that irresponsible domestic policies have previously and continue to embroil Lebanon in the cycle of foreign tutelage. And so, how will Lebanon face the challenges in the region without a government and what can a caretaker government do? How can the Lebanese people but perceive the danger of attempts to mobilize sectarian and confessional sensitivities? It is the Lebanese people who will pay the price for all this, as their rights and problems continue to be overlooked in the absence of a government responsible for issues of waste and corruption which works to occupy the people in conflicts which will bring no good for Lebanon and will do no favours for the concept of Lebanese co-existence. As well as this, issues relating to the conduct of the state are absent, such as balancing the budget; indeed does anyone remember that the time has come to sort out the 2010 budget? The previous budgets dating back to 2005 are missing. This simply means that there are those who are avoiding the issue because they do not want to open the doors to accountability and responsibility with regards to expenditure, in the knowledge that financial control is the basis of democracy. In short, the current political standstill is extremely important, particularly with relation to the governmental consultations whose repetition is causing frustration for the Lebanese people. This is exacerbated by those controversies which combine local, regional and international influences, and in which Lebanon is transformed from being a state with its own issues and personal concerns to an open arena for the implementation of projects of which Lebanon cannot afford the consequences.

Keeping Lebanon exposed to the fluctuating conditions in the region with all their possibilities, needs to be met by Arab balance which will reduce as much as possible the consequences of this. The Lebanese people need to hold on to control of their affairs rather than leaving themselves vulnerable to external regional and international interests in the shadow of Israel's blatant aggression against Lebanon! Here, it is important to remind anyone who has forgotten of the Saudi attempt in 2007 which was rejected by the March 14 group at which time it was in control of the governmental 'majority' under the leadership of Fouad Seniora. This called for the importance of a visit by Seniora to Damascus to tear down the psychological wall between the two countries, to restore confidence and to reach understandings about various issues, under the banner of Arab support. This rejection only served to keep Lebanon in the midst of successive crises. We must also not forget that the PM designate Saad Hariri was at that time apologizing publicly for not taking Saudi Arabia's advice! And thus, we need to make sure that the Syrian-Saudi steps are not neglected again nor met with indifference; rather, we need to invest in them and make use of this summit in working for the immediate formation of a national unity government which can undertake the requirements of this phase and will help guide Lebanon towards social and economic stability. Given all this, it is surprising that time-wasting is still continuing.

The country is at a dangerous crossroads and it seems clear that the mentality of personal interests is what is controlling the fate of the next government. This mentality and approach have already been tried and each time they depend on waiting for external influences and find some group or another in need of waiting at the expense of the collective national interest. And what of the statements of the commander of the Lebanese Forces, Samir Geagea, and his conditions regarding the government? The Lebanese people are stuck in the middle of regional and international minefields, the most dangerous of which is the situation in Palestine which is uncertain given the policies of the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Minister of Exterior, Avigdor Lieberman, both of whom are anticipating the visit by the US envoy, George Mitchell, to be a failure for the peace process. No breakthrough can be achieved by the new American administration relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, in the shadow of Netanyahu and Lieberman, except if the Obama administration bows to the demands of Netanyahu and consents to ignore the relevant international resolutions, to overlook the important and sensitive issues such as the status of Jerusalem, the settlements and the Palestinian right of return, and presents the Palestinians with a fait accompli to get more concessions in accordance with Israeli requirements!

In conclusion, creating a national unity government is an urgent matter in order to stabilize the situation in Lebanon on various levels, particularly in light of the fragile security situation and the daily incidents in the north, in some Palestinian camps and in various areas across Lebanon. The formation of the government represents a step which can only help to temper such risks and to provide effective and strong support to the work of the army and security services and thus to fortify the country against security and political intimidation. We at the National Dialogue Party feel that the opportunity is open in front of the PM designate but this cannot remain the case indefinitely. And if we, as Lebanese people, do not aspire to maintain our internal unity and our civil peace and to agree on the Lebanon that we want, then we will remain as we are. The time has come for the Lebanese people to come out of their long suffering. Will the Syrian-Saudi Arabian summit bear any fruit?