Connect with us

Middle East

Lebanese Parliamentary Coming Elections: A Gigantic Political Rivalry

Sondoss Al Asaad

Published

on

The Lebanese constitution stipulates that the parliamentary electoral process take place every four years; however, the political unrest during the recent years has delayed this election, rankling voters and galvanizing a campaign to change electoral laws. Per Lebanon’s constitution, it is committed that the president is a Maronite Christian; the prime minister is a Sunni Muslim and the speaker of the parliament a Shiite Muslim.In May 2018, Lebanon will hold its first parliamentary elections after postponing it several times since 2009.

The new electoral dynamic could significantly change the political calculus. This law has eventually granted the Lebanese immigrants their right to vote; has reduced the number of electoral districts in the country from 26 to 15 and has replaced the current plurality system with a system of proportional representation; increasing the sectarian diversity of MPs within each district.

Each of the eighteen religious sects, which the Lebanese constitution recognizes, the designations by which political seats are allocated, court foreign support. In response to Lebanon’s failure to condemn attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran following the kingdom’s execution of a Shi’ite cleric, the Saudis cancelled a three billion dollar aid package for the Lebanese army. Additionally, they increase the level of their aggressive threatening rhetoric anti Lebanon.

The expected election will take place after the consecutive political debates and since the former president; Michel Suleiman finished his term in 2014 without an agreement on who would succeed him. After two years of the presidential vacant, the Lebanese Politicians overcame the political deadlock in October 2016, electing General Michel Aoun as president.

In a televised speech, Hezbollah Secretary General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah urged the Lebanese to effectively take part in order to get the largest electoral outcome. He asserted that the relative law allows people to take their natural size in contrast to the law of majority, stressing, “The great harvest that we have achieved in Lebanon has cost us dear blood and it is our responsibility to keep our country strong.”

Lebanon is considerably polarised because of the continuous political unrest, Zionist attacks, security drastic events and the impact of the Syrian civil war. With this situation, President Aoun would play an effective role in terms of implementing changes and reforms. Undoubtedly, he stores experience of having an ability to weave understandings, build national bridges, address diverse forces and demonstrate strong leadership to rebuild the state.

Analysts consider that Aoun’s impending election would be an immense victory for Hezbollah, in terms of its political allies as well as its position in Lebanon and a painful climb down for the Saudis after their disengagement with Lebanon since February 2018. This co-operation dates back to 2006 when President Aoun signed a formal agreement of alliance between his Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah. President Michel Aoun has consistently backed Hezbollah ever since.

The Lebanese electoral system has followed sectarian allocations, entitled ‘consociational democracy’, since the independence from French Mandate in 1943. Seats in both the parliament and the government are reserved for the 18 different religious sects’ representatives. This sectarian designation divides sects and prevents political mobilisation around specific issues. As a result, the interests of outside powers take precedence over the interests of Lebanese voters.

Addressing his followers,Sayyed Nasrallah further highlighted, “Your votes in favour of the Resistance’s candidates would preserve the blood of the martyrs who have fallen in the Resistance’s path especially amid the current direct US interference in the region.”

After the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Al-Hariri, the Lebanese public was divided, either supporting the March 8 Alliance i.e. Resistance axis, or the March 14 Alliance i.e. anti-Resistance axis. Disagreements between these two groups at the very beginning intensified, and then subsided correspondingly with political developments.

Since the adoption of the new law, which is based on the proportional representation system, electoral experts confirmed that the distribution of seats among the political forces was almost conclusive. They emphasised that the “Shi’ite duo” Hezbollah and Amal Movement agreed that the sect’s parliamentary seats would be shared consensually. Such a deal means that Hezbollah and Amal would maintain additional parliamentary seats; particularly in the two districts: Baalbek/Hermel and Nabatieh/Bint Jbeil/Zahrani.

Amid the consecutive Zionist-American-Saudi failures in the region, analysts expect that the coming election, which many Lebanese are awaiting enthusiastically, might interrupt almost the nine years of stability.In the announcement of the electoral program for Hezbollah’s MPs and the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc, the Secretary-general of Hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said, “Be careful there are American-“Israeli” exercises. There are developments in the region and the world.”

Mostly all Lebanese understand that the stagnant political status quo can undermine security in the long run due to the foreign blatant interference in the Lebanese internal issues. A robust debate and concerns remain heavily centred on security and the status quo. It is obvious that the Zionist Saudi American powers aligned with some Lebanese actors would react undesirably to any significant shifts in the Lebanese political scene.

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah addressed his followers, “To the Lebanese, the upcoming parliamentary elections represent a serious opportunity for the Lebanese people to re-produce their national authority, benefiting from the state of stability and safety provided by the protection umbrella thanks to the equation of the army, the people and the resistance. The security presence in Lebanon is due to this equation. There is a dispute in the evaluation, but this is our opinion. There is a new electoral law based on proportionality in which we contributed greatly to its adoption. It will allow the Lebanese to better express their choices better and correct the parliamentary representation as much as possible.”

Analysts, further, assume that the Saudis could leverage the power and launch an economic boycott over Lebanon as they have done with Qatar. Sayyed Nasrallah expressed, “Everyone has come to realize that the country’s situation on the financial level has become dangerous. Thus, discussions were held that if we continue like this, will Lebanon become like Greece or not?” He added, “It is necessary for everyone to deal with the issue of fighting waste and corruption in all departments and institutions of the state that is linked to public money.” “The issue of fighting [corruption and waste] is an absolute national priority. We will commit ourselves and work on the basis of this priority in the coming stage,” Sayyed Nasrallah read.

Sondoss Al Asaad is a Lebanese freelance journalist, political analyst and translator; based in Beirut, Lebanon. Al Asaad writes on issues of the Arabs and Muslims world, with special focus on the Bahraini uprising.

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

The economic summit in Bahrain won’t be about Palestinian-Israeli conflict

Ksenia Svetlova

Published

on

In less than two weeks Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt will present in Manama the first part of the long-awaited “deal of the century”, the peace initiative of president Donald Trump designed to find an ultimate solution for the prolonged Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Iraq and Lebanon will not take part in the event, while Tehran had already accused the participants, mainly Saudi Arabia of “betrayal of the Palestinian struggle”. Following the massive pressure on Arab leaders and promises of significant economic development, the American administration was finally able to secure the participation of Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf states, and probably Morocco. Israel didn’t receive an official invitation for this event yet. It is, however, clear that it will be invited, and some rumors imply that PM Netanyahu himself might come to Bahrain, a country with which Israel doesn’t have any diplomatic relations.

Yet, it seems that this odd event in Manama will resemble a wedding without the bride. The groom will be there, so are the loving parents who will provide the dowry and the guests, but the bride, i.e. the Palestinian autonomy had already declared that it will not send any official or unofficial delegation to the upcoming economic conference.

The relations between the White House and the Palestinian administration had gone sour since President’s Trump decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. The Palestinians are suspicious of Trump’s attempts to promote “a deal” that might not include a reference to a two-state solution. For the last two years, the sole connection between Washington and Ramallah has been maintained by the respective security agencies.  Recent remarks made by the U.S. Ambassador to Israel on Israeli territorial claims in Judea and Samaria and the hints of Israel’s annexation plans intensified Palestinian concerns towards the unveiling of the first part of “the deal”. Palestinian officials had harshly criticized the participation of Arab countries in Bahrain conference, expressing hope that they will send low-key representation, while the Jordanian Kind explained that he decided to send a delegation to the summit “to listen and remain knowledgeable of what is taking place”.

Yet, the most fascinating thing about the economic conference is that it’s not at all about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict despite its title. With only one year left prior to the US presidential elections and considering the political turmoil in Israel and the unwillingness of the Palestinian partner to engage in any plan presented by Trump’s administration, there is little hope in Jerusalem, Ramallah or Washington that the “deal of the Century” will accumulate in peaceful solution in the current century.

Why, then, the American administration is investing time and energy in the upcoming Bahrain summit? The answer is clear: mostly, to consolidate the alliance of the “moderate Arab states”.  Considering the recent dramatic events at the sea of Oman and the attack on two oil-tankers, it will not be far-fetched to imagine that the growing tensions in Iran will overshadow the official reason for the gathering. In the same fashion, the “anti-terror” conference in Warsaw that took place in February this year, was solely about Iran, while all other aspects of anti-terrorism activities were left behind. The deterioration of the situation in the Persian Gulf is crucial for the hosts and their allies – the Arab countries in the Gulf. Egypt and Jordan were required to be there because they are key American allies in the region who also maintain diplomatic relations with Israel. The plan that is envisaged by Kushner and Greenblatt will include economic benefits and development programs for both Amman and Cairo who are dealing with pressing economic hardships. Would they prefer to stay away from the conference that is being shunned by the Palestinians? Probably. Could these two countries, who receive significant economic help from the US say no to the invitation and not show up at the wedding of the century? Highly unlikely.

Ironically, some 52 years ago in Khartoum, it was the Arab league that had unanimously voted on the famous “three no’s” resolution in Khartoum, declining any possibility of dialogue with Israel. Today, when the Arab states are weakened by the “Arab spring” and preoccupied with growing tensions in the Persian Gulf while the focus has shifted from the Palestinian question elsewhere, they are more prone than ever to go along with practically any American plan, while the only ones who refuse to cooperate with Trump and obediently fulfil his orders are the Palestinians who will be absent from Manama gathering. The support of the Palestinian struggle and its importance in Arab politics had dwindled, while other regional affairs had moved center stage. Considering this dramatic change of circumstances, the odd wedding in Bahrain doesn’t seem so odd anymore. It can be seen as yet another step in American attempts to consolidate an Arab alliance against Iran. The Palestinian-Israel conflict that will keep simmering after the conference just as it did before has nothing to do with it.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Who benefits most of suspicious attacks on oil tankers, tensions in the Gulf?

Payman Yazdani

Published

on

The events roiling the Persian Gulf in recent weeks and days have the potential to affect everything from the price of gas to the fate of small regional states.

A look at the tensions going on around the world including the Middle East and Persian Gulf region, East Europe, Venezuela all indicate that these tensions originate from the US administration’s unilateral unlawful measures.

The White House’s unlawful withdrawal from the Iran’s nuclear deal (JCPOA), designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist group, reimposing sanctions on Iran and trying to drive Iran’s oil export to zero all are provocative and suspicious moves of the US that have fueled the regional tensions.

The US and its regional allies including Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s suspicious and provocative move to accuse Iran of being behind the attacks on two ships at Fujairah in the UAE without presenting any document was also foiled by Iran’s vigilant approach and reduced tensions to some extent.

While the Japanese Prime Minister is visiting Iran after 4 decades and many expected even more reduction of the tensions in the region due his visit, in another suspicious and provocative move two oil tankers were targeted in Sea of Oman, a move that can intensify the tensions more than before.

Undoubtedly the US and its proxies in the region as usual will accuse of Iran being behind the incident without any document in hours once again, but the main question is that who is benefiting the most of the tensions in the Persian Gulf region?

Pondering the following reasons one can realize that the number one beneficiary of the tensions and attacks on tankers in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East is the USA and respectively Tel Aviv and the undemocratically  appointed rulers of some regional Arab states seeking their survival in following the US policies.

– Contrary to decades ago the US is now one of the biggest oil and gas producers in the world seeking to grab the market share of the other countries in the world. Following US unlawful withdrawal from the JCPOA and its efforts to drive Iran’s oil export to zero under the pretext of different accusations, in fact the US is making efforts not only to grab Iran’s share of the energy market but also to limit Iran’s income to reduce Iran’s regional influence. The US move to create tensions in Venezuela and East Europe and slapping sanctions against Caracas and Moscow can also be interpreted in this line.

– Any tension in the Persian Gulf not only will increase the energy price in global market but also will create enough pretexts for Washington to boost its military presence in the region. This means control of energy routes by the US in order to contain its rivals like China, EU, Japan and new rising economies like India which their economies are heavily dependent on the energy coming from the Persian Gulf and Middle East.

– Tensions in the region besides Iranophobia project will guarantee continuation of purchase of American weapons by some regional countries such as Saudi Arabia. By continuation of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia the US not only creates thousands of jobs for Americans but also keeps its rivals like China and Russia out of Middle East weapon market.

– Tensions and conflicts created by the US in Middle East has resulted in great rifts and divergence among regional states which is vital for Tel Aviv’s security and its expansionist policies.

From our partner MNA

Continue Reading

Middle East

The odds of success for Japanese PM’s visit to Iran

Payman Yazdani

Published

on

US President’s recent retreat from his previous rhetoric stances towards Iran should not be misinterpreted as the White House’s retreat from its policy of ‘maximum pressure’ on Iran.

In line with its maximum pressure on Iran policy, on Friday the United States imposed new sanctions on Iran that target the country’s petrochemical industry, including its largest petrochemical holding group, the Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries Company (PGPIC).

The main reason behind the changes to Trump administration’s tone against Iran in fact is internal pressure on him. Americans are against a new war in the region. Also opposition from the US allies which will suffer from great losses in case of any war in the region is another reason behind change to Trump’s tone.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is slated to visit Tehran on Wednesday June 12. He hopes to use his warm relation with Iran and the US to mediate between the countries.

Besides Abe’s warm relations with Iranian and the US leaders there are others reasons that potentially make him a proper mediator including Japan’s efforts to have independent Middle East policy and not having imperialistic record in the region which is a good trust building factor for Iran.

Above all, as the third largest economy of the world Japan is very dependent on the energy importing from the region. Japan imports 80 percent of its consuming energy from the Middle East which passes through Hormuz strait, so any war and confrontation in the region will inflict great losses and damages to the country’s economy and consequently to the world economy.

To answer the question that how Mr. Abe’s efforts will be effective to settle the tensions depends on two factors.

First on the ‘real will’ and determination of the US and Iran to solve the ongoing problems especially the US ‘real will’. One cannot ask for talk and at the same time further undermine the trust between the two sides by taking some hostile measures like new sanctions that the US slapped against Iran’s petrochemical section last night on the eve of Mr. Abe’s visit to Tehran. If there is a real will, even no need to mediator.

Second we have to wait to see that how the Japanese PM will be able to affect the US’ decisions. Iran’s Keivan Khosravi spokesman for the Supreme National Security Council said efforts to remove US extraterritorial sanctions against Iran could guarantee the success of Japanese PM’s visit to the Islamic Republic.

From our partner MNA

Continue Reading

Latest

Reports4 hours ago

International action can scale up hydrogen to make it a key part of a clean and secure energy future

The world has an important opportunity to tap into hydrogen’s vast potential to become a critical part of a more...

Economy9 hours ago

Guiding a new generation of learners on inclusive green economy

As population numbers continue to grow and material resource use rises to unprecedented levels, the limits of today’s dominant model...

Southeast Asia11 hours ago

Thailand’s Inequality: Unpacking the Myths and Reality of Isan

For decades, the ethnically and linguistically diverse people of Isan, Thailand, have been the subject of pervasive bias, often described...

Newsdesk12 hours ago

Special Course on “China’s Foreign Policy and Economy-2019” Launched in Armenia

The “China-Eurasia” Council for Political and Strategic Research in cooperation with the Armenian State University of Economics, started the “Rethinking...

Tourism13 hours ago

UNWTO and Ministry of Tourism of Indonesia join forces to promote gastronomy tourism

The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) together with the Ministry of Tourism of Indonesia have announced the launch of the UNWTO...

Energy News15 hours ago

IEA and African Union hold first ever ministerial meeting on development of Africa’s energy sector

The International Energy Agency co-hosted a joint ministerial summit with the African Union Commission (AUC) on Wednesday that brought together...

Africa17 hours ago

Russia, Africa and the SPIEF’19

In 2019, four African countries – Côte d’Ivoire, Lesotho Niger and Somalia – for the first time attend the St...

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy