The vacuum in Lebanon’s political system continues, under the shadow of growing fears of deterioration into a widescale war against Israel. So far, more than a year since the end of Michel Aoun's term (in October 2022), all the efforts by the political elite to reach a consensus on a new president have failed. A “Group of Five” (France, Saudi Arabia, US, Qatar, and Egypt) continues to push for progress in electing a president, who will also be able to represent Lebanon in possible negotiations with Israel to end the fighting in the north.
In the absence of a president, Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament Nabih Berri and Prime Minister of the transitional government Najib Mikati are taking advantage of the political vacuum and trying to fulfill the duties of the president, although some in Lebanon consider this an illegal move. In practice, while there is no president – who by law is supposed to be chosen from among the Christian community – the interests of the Maronite Christians are pushed aside in the decision making process, as well as in the negotiations that the US mediator, Amos Hochstein, is trying to advance with Israel. This frustration is expressed by some of the leaders of the community, for example, the Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rahi, who in his weekly sermons emphasizes repeatedly the need to act to elect a president. He claims that the Parliament does not have the mandate to enact laws in the absence of a president, and the transitional government can only deal with immediate matters and not with strategic issues. Christian leaders who oppose Hezbollah are even more blatant. Thus, Samir Geagea (Lebanese Forces party) and Samy Gemayel (Kataeb party) accuse the transitional government of surrendering to Hezbollah, which has turned the country into a battleground in the war against Israel and at the same time disrupts the presidential elections.
On the other hand, there are those who support Berri and Mikati and believe that Lebanon must not stand on the sidelines at this difficult time, and that Lebanon must take advantage of every opportunity to prevent a widescale war and resolve the disputes concerning “national interests” and the land border with Israel, even in the absence of a president. From Israel's point of view, it is important to make it clear to the international parties – led by the US and France – who are trying to promote the cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, that Hezbollah's attempts to take advantage of the opportunity and interweave the presidential issue with the settlement with Israel must be rejected outright. Agreeing to the election of Suleiman Frangieh, Hezbollah's candidate for the presidency, within the framework of the settlement could be a tragedy forever, since it will strengthen Hezbollah's political status in Lebanon and its influence on decision making processes.
The vacuum in Lebanon’s political system continues, under the shadow of growing fears of deterioration into a widescale war against Israel. So far, more than a year since the end of Michel Aoun's term (in October 2022), all the efforts by the political elite to reach a consensus on a new president have failed. A “Group of Five” (France, Saudi Arabia, US, Qatar, and Egypt) continues to push for progress in electing a president, who will also be able to represent Lebanon in possible negotiations with Israel to end the fighting in the north.
In the absence of a president, Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament Nabih Berri and Prime Minister of the transitional government Najib Mikati are taking advantage of the political vacuum and trying to fulfill the duties of the president, although some in Lebanon consider this an illegal move. In practice, while there is no president – who by law is supposed to be chosen from among the Christian community – the interests of the Maronite Christians are pushed aside in the decision making process, as well as in the negotiations that the US mediator, Amos Hochstein, is trying to advance with Israel. This frustration is expressed by some of the leaders of the community, for example, the Maronite Patriarch Bechara al-Rahi, who in his weekly sermons emphasizes repeatedly the need to act to elect a president. He claims that the Parliament does not have the mandate to enact laws in the absence of a president, and the transitional government can only deal with immediate matters and not with strategic issues. Christian leaders who oppose Hezbollah are even more blatant. Thus, Samir Geagea (Lebanese Forces party) and Samy Gemayel (Kataeb party) accuse the transitional government of surrendering to Hezbollah, which has turned the country into a battleground in the war against Israel and at the same time disrupts the presidential elections.
On the other hand, there are those who support Berri and Mikati and believe that Lebanon must not stand on the sidelines at this difficult time, and that Lebanon must take advantage of every opportunity to prevent a widescale war and resolve the disputes concerning “national interests” and the land border with Israel, even in the absence of a president. From Israel's point of view, it is important to make it clear to the international parties – led by the US and France – who are trying to promote the cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, that Hezbollah's attempts to take advantage of the opportunity and interweave the presidential issue with the settlement with Israel must be rejected outright. Agreeing to the election of Suleiman Frangieh, Hezbollah's candidate for the presidency, within the framework of the settlement could be a tragedy forever, since it will strengthen Hezbollah's political status in Lebanon and its influence on decision making processes.