Syria today (Syrie) : "Lebanon Votes" par Julien Lennert

May 2009

Lebanon Votes

By Julien Lennert

Lebanon’s general election, scheduled for June 7, is likely to be a key moment in determining whether the country can escape the turmoil of recent years and embark on a more stable and fruitful future.

At the heart of this future lies the relationship between Syria and Lebanon, which has been the source of both tension and instability in recent years. As the decisive election approaches, Syria says it will not intervene in Lebanese domestic affairs and that it simply wants a stable and secure neighbour on its western border.

“Whoever is elected will represent the Lebanese people,” Suleiman Haddad, chairman of Syria’s Foreign Affairs Committee, said. “We see that stability needs agreement from all sides.”

Yet it is clear that Syria is looking for the establishment of a Lebanese government sympathetic to its security needs. According to Samir Altaqi, head of the Orient Center for Studies in Damascus, there is a desire to “achieve a certain communal perception about the future of the main security and defence challenges facing Lebanon”.

Perceived threats

In addition to the threat posed to both countries by Israel, Syrian political analysts say Lebanon has been used as a launching pad for attacks against their country in recent years. Ties between Damascus and Beirut were severely strained following the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005. The subsequent Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon and the strengthening of the anti-Syrian March 14 Coalition, supported by an American president intent on destabilising the Syrian regime, created intense mistrust.

“Under the ‘Cedar Revolution’, under the Hariri March 14 Coalition, Lebanon was an instrument of George Bush’s attempt to destabilise Syria,” Joshua Landis, a Syria expert at the University of Oklahoma, said. “Lebanon was being used as a battering ram against Syria.”

However, on the back of Hezbollah’s sweep through Beirut in May 2008, tensions cooled significantly. Hezbollah’s ability to impose itself militarily on the capital city forced the March 14 Coalition to acknowledge the power of the pro-Syrian opposition, known as the March 8 Coalition, and pushed the different parties towards renewed dialogue. The result was the Syria-backed Doha Accord of May 21, which granted the opposition a blocking third of cabinet seats and led to the election of General Michel Sleiman as president.

Since the Doha Accord, Syria and Lebanon have enjoyed a rapid strengthening of ties. In August 2008, Sleiman paid his first visit to Damascus and embassies were recently established in both capitals for the first time since the two countries gained independence from French mandate rule some 60 years ago.

“This is an important step,” Ramy Mortada, the new Lebanese chargé d’affaires in Damascus, said. “Syria is an important state in the region and it has important relations with Lebanon and we think that further improving relations will create a fruitful environment.”

Analysts point to the stability that emerged after the inclusion of pro-Syrian forces in the Lebanese cabinet as a sign that Syria should not be denied a place at the Lebanese bargaining table.

“Syria has always had an important role in Lebanon,” Elie Ferzli, former deputy speaker of the Lebanese parliament, said. “It’s part of the Lebanese national consensus. You cannot build consensus in Lebanon without the Syrians.”

A new era

Not that the lead-up to the election has been free from controversy. A key point of friction is whether the structure of the cabinet agreed upon in Doha will continue after the election.

Accordingly, while professing its intention of maintaining a distance from the election, analysts say Syria is hopeful the Doha provisions will be institutionalised by the election results. The guaranteed inclusion of pro-Syrian elements in any new government would appease Syrian security fears. It would also guard against what Damascus has labelled the politicisation of the tribunal tasked with investigating the death of Rafik Hariri.

It seems Syria will be satisfied on this front. While many in the March 14 Coalition originally saw the Doha Accords as a temporary measure – one aimed at ensuring stability until they could win June’s elections and sideline pro-Syrian forces – a wider consensus has now emerged that the agreement should remain in place after the election, no matter what the outcome.

“For a while America wanted to upturn the Doha Agreement and Hariri was saying that if he won there would not be a blocking third and Doha would be out,” Landis said. “But Syria said no, Doha has to keep going.”

Recent US engagement with Syria, as well as new attempts at reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Syria, are also likely to temper anti-Syrian sentiments coming out of Lebanon. Both Saudi Arabia and America actively supported the anti-Syrian opposition and, in the past, worked to isolate Damascus both regionally and internationally. Syria’s improved relations with both countries will be felt in Lebanon.

In any case, polls suggest that neither the March 14 parliamentary majority nor the Syrian-supported opposition will achieve a decisive victory. Sensing the shifting sands, Syria’s critics in Lebanon have of late been conceding that there can be no Lebanese future without close Syrian engagement.

Saad Hariri, leader of the March 14 Coalition and son of Rafik, praised US President Barak Obama’s new engagement with Syria – a stance that would have been unimaginable of just months ago.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora has stated his support for a post-election unity government including pro-Syrian elements. In a recent editorial, Michael Young, a staunch March 14 supporter, acknowledged that “the forthcoming parliament will be much friendlier to Syria than the current one”.