Lebanon Tribunal Crisis Opens Wider Disputes

Lebanon Tribunal Crisis Opens Wider Disputes
Op-Ed Project Syndicate
Summary
Following the failure of the Syrian-Saudi mediation and the collapse of the government, Lebanon is facing significant political divisions and security risks.
Related Topics
Related Media and Tools
 
As the crisis in Lebanon deepens over the UN Tribunal investigating past assassinations, the negotiations to find a resolution have brought in wider political and security issues.  If negotiations succeed they could defuse the crisis and lead to the formation of a new government and a return to stability; if they fail, the crisis will get rapidly more acute with the possibility of violence.   
 
Saudi King Abdullah and Syrian President Bashar Assad had been working toward a deal for some months.  The talks, which had been shrouded in secrecy, collapsed ten days ago.  This led to the resignation of opposition ministers from office and the fall of the government. Qatar and Turkey rushed to fill the diplomatic void and have been trying to pick up where the Saudi-Syrian talks left off.  
 
Press reports have begun to reveal the outlines of the behind-the-scenes negotiations.  Saudi Arabia and the March 14 movement in Lebanon led by Prime Minister Saad Hariri, have apparently been pressing Syria and the March 8 camp led by Hizbullah, to accept significant political and security concessions in exchange for a break with the international tribunal.   
 
The concessions would include Syrian cooperation in disarming Palestinian groups in Lebanon and cancelling arrest warrants that a Syrian court had issued against over 30 of Hariri’s associates.  Domestically they would include an abrogation of the Doha Agreement of 2008 that had given veto power to the opposition in the government, and a return to the Taif Agreement of 1989 in which the Sunni Prime Minister enjoyed more influence over his cabinet and the executive branch.  
 
In other words, Saudi Arabia and March 14 have been trying to use the pressure of the tribunal to reduce the influence of Syria in Lebanon—and Hizbullah in state institutions.  Lebanon and the Arab states would help deflect blame from Hizbullah and Syria over the Hariri assassination, in exchange for Syria reducing its role in Lebanon, and Hizbullah reducing its obstruction of the Sunni prime ministership in Lebanon, while maintaining its arms and role as a national resistance.  
 
Each side blames the other for the failure of the talks.  Hariri and Saudi Arabia have not been willing to accept breaking support for the tribunal without a significant gain; and the opposition is interested in a wider, rather than a narrower role, in government.  Saudi foreign minister Saud al Faisal went so far as announcing that Saudi Arabia had suspended all talks over the matter and warning that Lebanon might face “secession and division”.    
 
The dispute indicates the depth of division over the future of the country.  Hariri and Saudi Arabia, having adjusted since 2006 to the reality that Hizbullah was not going to be defeated, are seemingly proposing a division of labor in which the Shiite community maintains an armed Hizbullah along with its extensive services, while the Sunni community regains a freer hand in leading the central government.  Hizbullah and the opposition, on the other hand, while taking for granted the armed continuation of the resistance, want a wider share of state power.  This would be either through being granted more seats in government and more security and economic posts in the state, or—as some have suggested—a renegotiation of the Taif Agreement that ended the civil war in 1990, with the aim of according the Shiite community more power.   
 
Given the complexity of the issues involved and the wide gap between the parties, it is unlikely that an agreement can be reached anytime soon.  Meanwhile the international tribunal is expected to announce the results of its investigation in the coming weeks.  This means that Lebanon will face the full impact of expected indictments against Hizbullah and maybe others without a new government and with fundamental political and security issues unresolved.  
 
If the disputes are not managed politically, it is possible that Hizbullah could use its power to deal a blow to the March 14 coalition as it did in May 2008, and push for the establishment of a March 8 government that would do its bidding.  This might deteriorate into sectarian clashes and the further loss of state control over parts of the country.  If this occurred, Lebanon would enter a period of serious civil unrest which probably could not be resolved without a full renegotiation of the Taif Agreement.   
 
The crisis over the international tribunal, therefore, has raised even more complex issues: over power-sharing and security in the state, and over Lebanon’s alignment in regional and international disputes.  
 
The Saudi-Syrian track was correct in trying to make political headway in the midst of dangerous tension, and regional and international players should support the current Turkish and Qatari efforts.  At best they could still find a political agreement to resolve the various elements of the current crisis and provide a fresh foundation for stability in Lebanon; at worst, they would provide a mechanism for managing a crisis in Lebanon that threatens to be long and acute. 
End of document
 
Source http://carnegie-mec.org/2011/01/21/lebanon-tribunal-crisis-opens-wider-disputes/b3qh

In Fact

 

81%

of Brazilian protesters

learned about a massive rally via Facebook or Twitter.

32

million cases pending

in India’s judicial system.

1 in 3

Syrians

now needs urgent assistance.

370

political parties

contested India’s last national elections.

70%

of Egypt's labor force

works in the private sector.

58

years ago

Carnegie began an internship program. Notable alumni include Samantha Power.

70%

of oil consumed in the United States

is for the transportation sector.

20%

of Chechnya’s pre-1994 population

has fled to different parts of the world.

58%

of oil consumed in China

was from foreign sources in 2012.

50%

of Syria’s population

is expected to be displaced by the end of 2013.

20

million people killed

in Cold War conflicts.

18%

of the U.S. economy

is consumed by healthcare.

$536

billion in goods and services

traded between the United States and China in 2012.

$100

billion in foreign investment and oil revenue

have been lost by Iran because of its nuclear program.

4700%

increase in China’s GDP per capita

between 1972 and today.

$11

billion have been spent

to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

2%

of Iran’s electricity needs

is all the Bushehr nuclear reactor provides.

82

new airports

are set to be built in China by 2015.

78

journalists

were imprisoned in Turkey as of August 2012 according to the OSCE.

67%

of the world's population

will reside in cities by 2050.

16

million Russian citizens

are considered “ethnic Muslims.”

Stay in the Know

Enter your email address to receive the latest Carnegie analysis in your inbox!

Personal Information
 
 
Carnegie Middle East Center
 
Emir Bechir Street, Lazarieh Tower Bldg. No. 2026 1210, 5th flr. Downtown Beirut, P.O.Box 11-1061 Riad El Solh, Lebanon
Phone: +961 1 99 12 91 Fax: +961 1 99 15 91
Please note...

You are leaving the Carnegie–Tsinghua Center for Global Policy's website and entering another Carnegie global site.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。