Lebanon’s presidential election: Two diverging approaches emerge

Report by Bassam Abou Zeid, English adaptation by Mariella Succar

With three days remaining until the presidential election session, Lebanon’s political landscape appears divided. Two distinct approaches have emerged regarding the presidency.

The first approach calls for a radical change in Lebanese policies, which many deem ineffective, and a restructuring of governance structures, starting from the presidency to the government. It emphasizes transparency, reform, combating corruption, adherence to international resolutions, and fostering regional and international openness.

Saudi Arabia has advocated this approach for years, with support from the United States, which considers Army Commander Joseph Aoun a top contender capable of executing this roadmap. They believe such changes could help attract renewed financial investment from Arab and international sources, supporting projects that drive economic revival, growth, and job creation.

The second approach seeks to improve conditions in Lebanon without exerting significant pressure on key factions such as Hezbollah and Amal, citing fears of internal conflict. Qatar advocates a “soft power” approach to change, aiming to elect a president who would not provoke Hezbollah and Amal. In return, Qatar offers financial aid and donations to support Lebanon’s next government. They consider General Elias Baissari the most suitable candidate for this policy.

Through their envoy to Beirut, Prince Yazid bin Farhan, the Saudis have observed that most Lebanese factions remain unconvinced of the need for reforms aligned with Arab and international standards. This sentiment was relayed to U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein during discussions with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan in Riyadh.

Hochstein remains steadfast in Beirut, continuing to insist on reforms that align with Arab and international standards as a path to Lebanon’s rescue.

However, if Lebanese parties forming a majority opt to maintain the status quo, Lebanon may lose priority on the U.S. agenda and, more significantly, on Saudi Arabia’s.