Alwaght- While with the end of the presidential term and the deadline to the PM-designate to form a new cabinet Lebanon is in a state of political uncertainty and is governed by a caretaker government, these days a debate about Taif Agreement as the stepping stone of the country's political system is heating up, and even on Saturday a meeting in support of the agreement and its continuation was held with the presence of prominent Lebanese figures.
Where did it start?
The origin of all the debates around Taif Agreement in recent days is one place: Saudi embassy. The Saturday meeting was arranged by the Saudi ambassador to Lebanon Walid bin Abdullah Bukhari, who gathered about 1000 Lebanese political, economic, diplomatic, and academic figures seemingly to silence voices growing critical of Taif Agreement.
Some unofficial news in Lebanon indicated that Switzerland and France intended to persuade the Lebanese political parties to revise the Taif Agreement and reach another accord.
The Taif Agreement is a deal that was signed in 1989 between the leaders of various Lebanese parties and groups in Saudi Arabia and managed to end 15 years of bloody civil war as they agreed to share power.
Immediately after the word spread about proposed changes to the accord, the Saudi ambassador denied any changes to the Taif Agreement and implicated that Lebanon would move to insecurity and partition if the agreement is altered.
Although it seems that the Saudi move is a reaction rather than a planned action, a look at the Saudi goals can decide that the new Saudi scheme for Lebanon that is executed with highlighting Taif Agreement is a purposeful planning, especially that even Hezbollah, the Amal Movement, and the others have not opposed the Taif Agreement so far to worry Saudi Arabia and its Lebanese proxies. Sheikh Nabil Qaouk, a member of Hezbollah Central Council, stressed that no side in the country has called for changes to Taif Agreement.
Saudi goals
The Saudi show of strong support to Lebanon stability and expressing concerns about the grave consequences of reviewing the Taif Agreement in no way correspond to the Saudi foreign policy approach to Lebanon that led to cutting off financial aids to Lebanon, taking hostage Saad Hariri while he was holding the prime minister post of Lebanon, and severing diplomatic relations with Beirut over Lebanese Information Minister George Kordahi’s criticism of Saudi war on Yemen. So, it can be concluded that Riyadh is altering its stances concerning Lebanon's developments and is seeking a more active approach since Riyadh’s allies in Lebanon think that the Saudi punitive measures on Beirut not only have not sidelined Hezbollah but also the resistance movement's position is consolidated against the rivals and in the eyes of public, especially that Hezbollah with victory in gas deal with Israel emerged as the only protector of Lebanon's interests in the absence of support to Beirut from foreign actors. So, Riyadh, by raising such issues as Lebanon's incapablity to elect a president and form a new cabinet in recent months, is seeking to flex its muscles in Lebanon's developments.
Meanwhile, the Saudis think that maneuvering on the Taif Agreement can compensate for the setbacks caused by the role of the Hezbollah and Iran in Lebanon.
The Taif Agreement is a reminder of Saudi Arabia's role in ending Lebanon's long-standing crisis, and naturally any commemoration of it is done to emphasize Riyadh's historical approach of supporting peace and stability in Lebanon to eliminate the negative view among Lebanese public opinion caused by interventionist and tension-creating policies of Saudi Arabia in Lebanon's internal affairs.
A look at the positions of prominent Lebanese politicians in Saturday's meeting clearly shows Riyadh's exploitation of the Taif Agreement. Acting Prime Minister Najib Mikati said the meeting was proof that Saudi Arabia still stood by Lebanon, and the large attendance showed everyone agreed that the deal was still the best deal to implement.
Akhdar Ibrahimi, a prominent Lebanese politician, during the meeting remembered as “champions of Taif Agreement” the late Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri and also late Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.
Another goal of the Saudis is, indeed, to disrupt the process of forming a new government in which Hezbollah playing a distinguished role. Although the composition of the current Lebanese parliament is such that no faction or coalition has the necessary superiority to elect the president, Hezbollah and its allies in the March 8 Alliance are considered the dominant power in the parliament and therefore, electing a figure without their contentment is impossible. Meanwhile, the eight-year presidency of Michel Aoun as a figure close to the Hezbollah was a very bitter experience for Riyadh's interests, influence, and plans in Lebanon as during this period, Saad Hariri, the most important ally of Riyadh in Lebanon, left the politics, and the Saudi-aligned March 14 Alliance suffered a deep split, but on the other side, Hezbollah, its arms, and its political determining role are now fully established.
During the three rounds of voting held to date to elect a president, the Saudi-aligned camp clung to candidacy of Michel Moawad, a staunch opponent of Hezbollah. In the third session on October 20, in his best performance, Moawad only managed to get the votes of 42 MPs, which is less than half of the support needed in the first round. In all rounds, a large number of MPs close to Hezbollah walked out of the parliament to prevent a quorum for the second round, making it highly unlikely for Moawad to win the necessary 65 votes.
In these conditions, Saudi Arabia has stepped in by raising support to Taif Agreement, not for the sake of uniting various Lebanese groups around electing a new president but, on the contrary, for painting as disruption of Taif Agreement the Hezbollah’s blocking of election of a Riyadh-favored figure.
According to the Taif Agreement, the three key posts of prime minister, president, and speaker of the parliament were assigned to Sunni Muslims, Maronite Christians, and Shiites, respectively, and this distribution has been working to date. But the Saudis now interpret the united opposition of the Shiite front, represented by Hezbollah and Amal Movement, to a figure favorable to Riyadh for the president post as an assault to the principles of distribution of power in Lebanon that rest on Taif Agreement.
And finally, one of the Saudi and allies-emphasized articles of the agreement that is always instrumentalized against Hezbollah is the movement’s arms. The article 1 of the agreement calls for disbanding Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias and their disarming by the government six months after amending the document of forming national unity government. Triggering the article again is part of a Saudi plot targeting the Lebanese stability. During the 33 years since Taif Agreement, Hezbollah has never used its arms to advance its home policies against the rivals. Rather, Hezbollah's military power has always served the nation's security in the face of the Israeli threats and provided remarkable support to the country's military and government. This is a reality the Lebanese accept more than any other time and, therefore, the Saudi efforts are in vain because neither Hezbollah would walk back from its principal stances countering foreign interference in Lebanon's election of an independent president nor the threadbare Saudi play with Taif Agreement would mend Riyadh's damaged face.
