'Big Dangers'; Lebanon’s Political, Constitutional and Economic Crises Fueling Federal

The political crisis that Lebanon is going through is not the first and will not be the last, the political regime with the agreement of all forces is now unable to find solutions to the existing problems.

The leader of the Druze sect Walid Jumblatt, known for his political acumen and cunning, he repeatedly declared “the death of the Taif Agreement”, it is the current constitution of Lebanon.

On his way, many parties went on saying: The old Lebanon is over the Second Republic (the post-Civil War 1975 state) also died out, a new regime must be born to fill all the constitutional and political loopholes that contributed to the birth of previous crises.

But the problem is that no one in Lebanon dares to present his true vision of the ideal regime in which he sees the solution and salvation.

Some of them refer the issue to the non-implementation of the Taif Agreement (the 1989 civil war) and demand the return to the agreement, others see the solution to expanded administrative decentralization, that would relieve the pressure on the shoulders of the capital, Beirut, and it grants some powers to other regions and governorates.

While some seek to promote “federal” as the ideal ruling regime, Lebanon can only be governed by sectarian cantons that are independent in their religious rites, and united in its foreign and defense policy.

Is it possible that “federal” will lead Lebanon and its people to the shore of safety? What are the obstacles in front of that?

 

Old Proposal

The federal regime is not a recent proposal in the dictionary of politicians in Lebanon; Rather, it dates back to before the declaration of “the state of Greater Lebanon” in 1920.

At that time, some Christian forces were calling for “a Christian homeland of their own”, and for the annexation of Islamic regions to Syria, this was the choice of Arabism Muslims at that time, until the Maronite Patriarchate in Lebanon settled the controversy through agreement with the Mandate authorities, Greater Lebanon appeared in its current form.

However, this did not prevent the continuation of political and sectarian divisions between Muslims and Christians, on this particular point until the date of Lebanon's independence from the French mandate in 1943.

Historian Saqr Abu Fakhr says in an article published by “The New Arab” on June 8, 2020, that: “Whenever the political conflict in Lebanon intensifies, the talk returns to the fact that problems can only be solved by the separation of Christians from Muslims”.

This is what the Lebanese actually knew, during the civil war that erupted as result of the Palestinian presence in Lebanon in 1975.

Academic and political activist Harith Sulaiman reveals to “Al-Estiklal” that: “The proposal for federal was present before the Taif Agreement, and before the establishment and consolidation of what is today called political Shi'ism”.

The federal raised today, according to Sulaiman, it is the twin of the Christian national homeland project, which the late Bashir Gemayel (former President of the Republic of Lebanon) worked for and died because of it.

This was also revealed by Saqr Abu Fakhr in his article, saying: The former President of the Republic, Camille Chamoun (1952-1958), together with the leader of the Kataeb Party, Pierre Gemayel, submitted a document entitled “The Federal Republic of Lebanon” to the Lebanese Peace Conference in Lausanne in 1984.

 

Federal Project

With the signing of the Taif Agreement, which ended the civil war, and introduced a new political regime to the country, called the “Second Republic”, under the tutelage of the regime of former Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, with the approval of the United States and Saudi Arabia.

But with the emergence of “the new Middle East project” at the beginning of the new millennium, and talking about federal and the emergence of new entities on the ruins of old countries, the circulation of the federal project in Lebanon is back again.

At the end of 2014, a number of representatives of Christian forces called for a founding conference to “discuss the project of comprehensive federal and decentralization”, from it emerged a committee called the “Federal Contractors Conference” in order to market the project.

As a consequence, the Secretary-General of the conference, Alfred Riachi, made huge efforts to promote the idea of federalism. It included extensive media appearances, visits to various political and spiritual leaders, among the most prominent of them was the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah.

In May 2020, Riachy published a map of the “federal state of Lebanon”, which assumes the division of Lebanon into six cantons, divided equally between Christians and Muslims.

Where the Muslim cantons are distributed among the Islamic sects, one canton each for Sunnis, Shiites, and Druze, in exchange for three Christian cantons that guarantee Maronite control over them.

A group of Lebanese Christian academics studying at American universities prepared the “Draft Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Lebanon and its Constitution”.

They began to work enthusiastically on marketing it through the local media that revolve in the Christian astronomy, through intensive meetings and seminars.

The content of their project referred to the necessity of establishing a federal Lebanese state, “comprising 4 different ethno-cultural groups with a partial common history and sharing a land”.

This proposal makes Lebanon a mosaic of sectarian colors divided into 1633 cities and villages, of these, 781 are Christian, 353 are Shiite, 272 are Sunni, 126 are Druze, and 101 are non-majority regions.

It also provides for the abolition of elections at the general level, for the Lebanese to be represented in their parliament through elections in the cantonal parliaments.

Preserving the law for all citizens of the canton, freedom of belief and thought, equality and action, each within a communal canton that has its own regime and its own business.

As for the federal state administration, it consists of a fixed Christian president who does not change, a head of government from among the heads of the cantons is chosen on the basis of age, and for a term of one year.

The administrative Beirut will be the capital of the federal state of Lebanon, provided that each canton elects its capital, sovereignty is the law, not the cantonal governments.

As for Lebanon's relationship with abroad, this is the major problem that Lebanon suffers from today, the draft stipulates that the federal state administration shall take over foreign relations, and each canton must be consulted when signing any agreement affecting its circumstances.

 

 

Contradictory Positions

This project in its details did not explicitly receive public support from the various Christian parties, which calls it under the title “Extended Decentralization”.

In its part, the Qatari newspaper “Al-Watan” published on September 24, 2016, a report that stated: “General Michel Aoun put forward the project of federating Lebanon 13 years ago from today, after a visit to America, during which he gave several lectures, he told those close to him at that time that federal is the solution in Lebanon”.

On the other hand, the head of the Lebanese Kataeb Party “Sami Gemayel” considers that decentralization is one of the pillars of the future Lebanon, it is the party that has always called for federalism during its founding.

For his part, the Director of Media and Communication in the Forces Party, Charles Jabbour, told “Al-Estiklal” that “the dispute is over Hezbollah's adherence to its regional role and its weapons”.

He considers that “in light of this adherence, there is no need to search for the optimal constitution for Lebanon, because there is no value for any constitution that is not implemented along the lines of the current constitution, because of the party’s role and weapon”, he wondered: “What is the importance of federal if it is not able to address the issue of Hezbollah's weapons and its role?”.

He concludes by saying: “What is the interest of the federal state as long as the state has lost its decision, there is no agreement among the Lebanese on the basics? Can federal be implemented in the first place without the consent of all parties?”.

For his part, Mustafa Alloush, deputy head of the Future Movement (which is headed by Saad Rafik Hariri), confirms to “Al-Estiklal”, that talking about federal is illogical in Lebanon.

He adds: “Our problem lies in the sovereign, foreign and defense decisions, how will we solve these problems in the presence of Hezbollah?”.

Alloush asks: “What if Hezbollah decided to fight a war, on what basis will it be dealt with?”, he answers that the federal proposal is a prelude to partition in Lebanon.

As Alloush points out that his movement “has no problem with decentralization, because it is one of the provisions of the constitution and the Taif Agreement”, and he confirms that “any separatist movement will be on the lookout for it”.