Not surprisingly, Nawaf Salam, Lebanon’s designated prime minister, is now wading knee-deep in the scum of the country’s pie-sharing politics. This image disappoints Lebanese who welcomed the election of President Joseph Aoun as a break with the sordid practices of the past. Still, Aoun and Salam have a great deal going for them, and now is their time to fight for the change they say they want to introduce.
We’re still at a stage where the president and designated prime minister are discussing the cabinet’s shape. No names have been suggested, it seems, although this process may be starting. On Tuesday, Salam reacted with vigor to the Shiite duo of Hezbollah and Amal, who have sought to impose conditions with regard to the appointment of Shiite ministers. He declared, “I am not Liban Post,” the national mail carrier, making it clear he intends to appoint a cabinet according to his convictions and promises.
Salam is right to raise the tone with the two parties, but he would also be justified in doing so with all blocs in parliament. The post-Taif constitution mandates consultations between a designated prime minister and parliamentarians, but Salam is under no obligation to take what they say into consideration. Parliament’s final word on a government is a vote of confidence, and Salam should exploit these parameters to get what he wants, in agreement with Aoun. More importantly, he needs to set red lines and avoid what he and the president don’t want, and there is the challenge.
One of Salam’s first statements was that he would not resort to quotas in the government, a tradition that has transformed all Lebanese governments into unproductive, deadlocked bodies divvied up among the sectarian political parties. Yet the Shiite duo (and it’s hardly alone) has continued to address the current cabinet-formation process with the same reflexes as the past. They are insisting that the finance minister be a Shiite, that Hezbollah and Amal name all Shiite ministers, and even that the acting central bank governor, Wassim Mansouri, remain as governor, even though the post has traditionally been held by a Maronite.
There are tactical reasons for Hezbollah’s and Amal’s demands. They are hostile to Aoun’s and Salam’s declared political programs, and seek to destabilize both men at the beginning of Aoun’s mandate. But the president and prime minister have quite a few weapons of their own, and should begin deploying them right away.
For starters, there are three red lines on which Aoun and Salam should insist. The first is that Hezbollah and Amal should be denied a blocking third in the cabinet—meaning a third of the seats plus one—that would allow them to bring the cabinet down if their ministers resign, prevent cabinet meetings, and impose their preferences in the cabinet’s policy statement. Nor should Aoun and Salam accept a disguised form of the blocking third, in which Hezbollah and Amal would, officially, not have more than a third of ministers, but would surreptitiously control the decisions of an additional minister who appears to belong to the share of another party in the cabinet.
A second red line is that both men should reject any mention of the triptych that has been included in all recent cabinet statements, namely, “The Army, the People, and the Resistance.” The formulation had effectively placed Hezbollah on the same level as the Lebanese armed forces in having weapons. This is no longer tenable as a large majority of the population opposes the party’s independent arsenal. As Aoun declared in his inaugural address, to great applause, he would work “to ensure the state’s right to have a monopoly over weapons,” making acceptance of the “Army, People, Resistance” formula impossible.
A third point that Aoun and Salam should make non-negotiable is the right of the president or prime minister to name Shiite ministers, regardless of what Hezbollah and Amal prefer. Nothing in the constitution affords sectarian political parties the right to appoint all ministers from their community. The Shiite duo will reply that any refusal to grant them their wish goes against the National Pact, but that’s nonsense. Communal representation is not tied to political parties; it is tied to communities. And Salam is in no way denying the Shiite community its fair share of ministers.
If the president and prime minister forge ahead with these conditions, what do they risk? That the Shiite duo will refuse to participate in the government? Think again. There is no way that Hezbollah and Amal will avoid doing so, and this for two reasons: First, they do not want to cede maneuvering room to Aoun and Salam to take steps that might weaken the duo further. And second, if they are out of the government, it is more likely that the president and designated prime minister will obtain foreign funding, particularly Arab funding, to rebuild mainly Shiite areas of Lebanon. In other words, a government in which Hezbollah and Amal is absent would be the one responsible for reviving Shiite areas, which would only underline Hezbollah’s and Iran’s shortcomings in this regard. It is inconceivable for Hezbollah and Amal to put themselves in such a position, one that would only bolster the credibility of the state among many Shiites.
Hezbollah and Amal might resort to another trick and refuse to vote confidence in the government. So what? It is almost certain that Salam’s cabinet, if it is perceived as genuinely reformist, would easily win a confidence vote in this parliament. That’s all Salam needs, and if the two Shiite parties are unhappy, then why should that matter? Lebanon can legitimately function even without an absolute consensus over all decisions in the state, and it’s time to prove it.
But what if Salam’s cabinet somehow loses a vote of confidence? Both Aoun and his designated prime minister should present their government by highlighting their reformist intentions, affirming their belief that Lebanon can no longer continue as it has in the last decade and a half, and making it clear that if the government does not win a vote of confidence, the prospect of Arab aid to rebuild devastated areas of the country will probably disappear. They could remind everyone that their red lines are aimed at fulfilling the objectives both men publicly enunciated and that were welcomed by most Lebanese, therefore that it’s up to parliament to bear responsibility for the outcome of its vote. Salam could then end with a statement that he has no interest in forming a government destined to fail, therefore if confidence is denied, he will happily go home and enjoy life.
At this point, Salam has only one duty: to put together a government that fulfills his preferences and those of Joseph Aoun, and that can secure a vote of confidence in parliament. That’s what the constitution lays out, end of story. Hezbollah and Amal must realize that any delay in his doing so will harm their interests, because it means more time is wasted to obtain funding for rebuilding Shiite areas, when discontent in the community is rising with the consequences of Hezbollah’s war. More perniciously, any slowdown in the cabinet-formation process could give Israel an excuse to remain in the south, and it’s not this Trump administration that is soon going to push them out.
Finally, Salam, who is otherwise secular, should see where he stands. Whether he plays the sectarian card or not, his attitude should be defined by the simple fact that in Lebanon and Syria he is at the forefront of a revitalized Sunni community. Therefore, he is in a position to form his cabinet with the attendant confidence accompanying such a situation. There is no need for him to bend to the intimidation of his political adversaries if the conditions they seek to impose only thwart his efforts.
Salam holds the strong cards in his standoff with the Shiite duo. He is backed by the president, most Lebanese, his community, and Arab and international states. He is also supported by the constitution. There is simply no reason for him to compromise on his ambitions if he does not have to do so. It may take a political brawl for him to win, but he should realize that the conditions will never be as advantageous as they are now.
