What Happened?
After a vacuum of over two years in the presidency, Lebanon’s parliament elected armed forces commander Joseph Aoun as the country’s fourteenth president. What broke the political deadlock was intensified international pressure, mainly by the United States and Saudi Arabia, who are part of a quintet that has tried for over two years to end the presidential void and that also includes Egypt, Qatar, and France. Both the U.S. envoy to Lebanon Amos Hochstein and the Saudi envoy Yezid bin Farhan mediated among the Lebanese political parties, building a consensus around Aoun, and crafting a deal that brought him to office. The fact that Donald Trump will begin his term on January 20 and the prospective turbulence this may cause in the Middle East were also incentives for the Lebanese to stabilize their country beforehand.
Why Is It Important?
The election signaled a major shift in Lebanese politics. Hezbollah initially opposed Aoun for the presidency. However, the fact that the party was significantly weakened politically and militarily in the recent conflict with Israel made it unable to ultimately prevent his ascension to office. Hezbollah is reeling from major losses in its leadership, personnel, and arms, as well as its current incapacity to maintain a stranglehold over the Lebanese political system. International oversight over Lebanon’s land, air, and sea routes is also putting significant pressure on the party. However, by delaying the second round of elections for two hours on election day, the Shiite duo—Hezbollah and the allied Amal Movement—tried to show that while they may have lost influence, the election of a consensual president could not happen without them. Mohammed Raad, the head of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, expressed this view by saying that the two parties had delayed the vote to underline that, “[a]s we were the ones who protected Lebanese sovereignty with our lives, we are also the defender of the national consensus.”
The election also came on the heels of the downfall of the Assad regime in Syria, the ripple effects of which are being felt in Lebanon. The dramatic shift in Syrian power dynamics affirmed the weakening of Iran’s presence in the Levant, denying Hezbollah a weapons resupply route from Iran through Iraq. It also accelerated Arab reengagement with Damascus, particularly by countries in the Gulf, who are keener than ever to stave off growing Turkish influence in Syria. The Gulf states (other than Qatar, a Turkish ally) do not want to see Iran replaced by Türkiye in Syria. The desire to counterbalance Ankara regionally appears to be why Lebanon has seen a more active Saudi role in pushing for a presidential candidate of Riyadh’s choice.
Aoun comes to the presidency facing mammoth challenges. Today, Lebanon and its population are fragmented and polarized. The country has been in the throes of a devastating financial and economic crisis for the past five years, with little done by the Lebanese leadership to undertake necessary reforms. Last year, Lebanon entered into a catastrophic war with Israel that caused the internal displacement of around 20 percent of the population and losses estimated by the World Bank at $8.5 billion, of which $3.5 billion was direct damage caused to physical structures. The institution also estimated economic losses at $5.1 billion and noted that 166,000 jobs had been lost because of the conflict. The 60-day deadline set by the ceasefire agreement for Israel to withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon is set to expire on January 24.
To address these challenges, Aoun will have to name a new prime minister after parliamentary consultations next week, negotiate the shape of a new government, and determine the leeway he has to enact urgent reforms. This will include the appointment of key civil service personnel, preparing for the 2026 parliamentary elections, building up the country’s military and security apparatus, securing Lebanon’s borders, and undertaking the colossal task of reconstructing areas devastated in the war. While many of these challenges will be internal, they will depend on external factors, including full implementation of the ceasefire agreement with Israel and the withdrawal of Israeli forces.
What Are the Implications for the Future?
Joseph Aoun has the potential to be a new Fouad Chehab, the founder and first commander of Lebanon’s armed forces after France ended its mandate over Lebanon in 1943 and Lebanon’s president between 1958 and 1964. Chehab’s term in office, which came in the wake of the mini civil war of 1958, is considered to be a period of reform and institution-building in the country.
In his speech, Aoun promised to protect the constitution, combat corruption, rebuild institutions, introduce reforms, including expanded administrative decentralization, and engage in reconstruction. A key moment in his speech was his comment that the armed forces must have the monopoly over the use of weapons, which was directed at Hezbollah. Many observers expect the president to initiate a national dialogue on a new defense strategy, which would include integration of the party’s weapons into the state. Equally important was Aoun’s pledge to reform the judiciary and prevent political intervention in judicial matters.
This vision creates conundrums that will require policy tradeoffs. Any process leading to Hezbollah’s disarmament would be a break with the past, in which ministerial policy statements routinely repeated that at the heart of the country’s political order was a triad of the army, the people, and the resistance, placing the armed forces and Hezbollah on the same level. In this respect, Aoun will face tensions between his different objectives, but these may simultaneously produce openings for solutions. Hezbollah does not want to disarm, but is keen to see reconstruction of the areas destroyed in the war with Israel. But this will not happen without international financial support, which requires economic and political reforms from the government and serious engagement by Hezbollah on its arms. Meanwhile, judicial reform, by aiming to bar political interference, seeks to undermine impunity for crimes committed against the Lebanese people, including the financial and economic collapse of 2019–2020, which wiped out the life savings of hundreds of thousands of Lebanese, and the horrific August 2021 Beirut port explosion.
Whether the new president can become Lebanon’s 21st century Chehab will depend on a number of factors. Paramount among these is his own vision for Lebanon’s future, of which we know relatively little so far, though his inaugural speech did show the direction in which he is thinking. His success will also be contingent on the willingness of Lebanon’s political factions to cooperate with a man who ultimately may seek to undermine the prerogatives they have carved out for themselves in the system over the decades. The selection of the prime minister and a cabinet that is capable and willing to adopt reforms will be critical in this regard.
Aoun’s agenda will also depend on the degree of international support he and his government receive, both in terms of financial and institutional backing for his reform and reconstruction agenda as well as for maintaining Lebanon’s territorial integrity. Statements coming out of Israel suggest an intention to maintain its occupation of parts of southern Lebanon after the end of the 60-day period. Such a decision would only reinforce Hezbollah’s raison d’être for maintaining its weapons. Ultimately, Joseph Aoun’s election is a moment of opportunity. The successes or failures of his presidency will be shaped by his determination to rebuild Lebanon’s institutions and move from factional to nationalist politics, as well as by a broader geopolitical context that is supportive of the program he wants to adopt.
