Unveiling the US stance: Pressure, sanctions, and diplomacy in Lebanon's presidential election

Press Highlights
2023-06-06 | 01:52
High views
Share
LBCI
Share
LBCI
Whatsapp
facebook
Twitter
Messenger
telegram
telegram
print
Unveiling the US stance: Pressure, sanctions, and diplomacy in Lebanon's presidential election
Whatsapp
facebook
Twitter
Messenger
telegram
telegram
print
8min
Unveiling the US stance: Pressure, sanctions, and diplomacy in Lebanon's presidential election

Despite the policy of raising ceilings adopted by the Shiite duo in response to the nomination of Jihad Azour by the opposition forces and the Free Patriotic Movement, reflecting the shock specifically felt by Hezbollah due to the inclusion of Gebran Bassil in the opposition's alignment through the convergence around the nomination of the former Minister of Finance, the rushing of Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, to schedule a date for the 12th electoral session was never a surprise.

A combination of internal and external reasons and considerations dictate to Berri not to neglect the new reality imposed by Azour's nomination, who had previously announced clearly that he would open the doors of Parliament if serious candidates were available. 
 
Sleiman Frangieh and Jihad Azour are the most serious candidates. 

He is confident that the Americans do not "joke" about imposing sanctions on those obstructing and hindering. Therefore, it was necessary to schedule an electoral session, as all players realized it would end in a stalemate.
This leads us to reconsider the true position of the United States towards the electoral process and the Lebanese file as a whole.

Is it true that the US administration does not care about all these details and is not interested in the identity of the future president? Or is what is said in public not reflecting what is happening behind the scenes?

Lebanese affirm continuous communication with US officials, indicating that Washington is extremely concerned about the deteriorating situation in Lebanon due to the ongoing collapse. Therefore, it is keen to provide assistance to prevent the disintegration of security forces. 

There is even talk of the administration's readiness to provide financial aid to address the issue of refugees as long as their return to their country is not currently available. All of this is aimed at preventing major chaos.

Diplomatically, according to informed sources, the Americans are leading a series of diplomatic communications with Riyadh and Paris because they fear the occurrence of catastrophic chaos, which they reject for many reasons. 
They want to achieve calm, reactivate institutions, and make progress in the cooperation program with the International Monetary Fund, a condition they will not abandon. The approach is through presidential elections and an effective government not paralyzed by political balances.

However, they wanted to avoid being at the forefront, so they left the French on one side and the Qataris on the other to handle the solutions toward achieving the outcome. 

That is because they are cautious about delving into details. Therefore, they are "off-screen," except for occasionally outlining rare and specific positions. But there is no pressure on any faction or temptations for any faction, at least publicly.

They refuse to engage in supporting any preferred candidate as they also refrain from vetoing any candidate, for the simple reason that any clear and decisive stance would harm that candidate if they were to support them, as they would be demonized, especially since they are certain that any candidate who reaches the presidency will not be on the opposing side with them. So why object for free?

However, this behavior is subject to discussion among US officials, as some believe that involvement in specific names, whether negatively or positively, may provoke a reaction at the Lebanese level.

Americans prefer to avoid exposing themselves to it, which may undermine the chances of some candidates they find acceptable and strengthen the chances of unacceptable candidates.

However, what is certain is that there is a great deal of interest from Americans in the presidency, more than others. Still, they avoid getting into the details, although some officials prefer a more decisive approach. 

So far, the US administration has used "soft power": not intervening directly except through a basket of specifications and then threatening to impose sanctions. On the other hand, they rely on diplomatic channels and discreet communications.

For this reason, the efforts of some Lebanese officials who visited Washington recently focused on convincing the Americans to put a brake on the French initiative. Indeed, insiders say that the Americans have been in contact with the French, requesting them to halt their presidential move in support of Sleiman Frangieh while simultaneously working to push the opposition forces to reach an agreement on a new candidate. 

Moreover, insiders confirm that US officials explicitly asked opposition MPs to open the doors for dialogue with Gebran Bassil, the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, regarding a consensus candidate after he sent numerous diplomatic messages through third parties to the Americans, affirming his rejection of Frangieh's nomination and his desire to engage in dialogue with the opposition regarding an alternative candidate. And this is what happened.

So, it has become clear that Washington is exerting pressure to elect a president due to growing concerns about the power vacuum. 
 
The focus in recent times has been on the opposition forces, as the other side is armed with the nomination of the leader of the "Marada Movement." 
 
This is where the effort converged, resulting in a consensus around the name of Jihad Azour. According to insiders, even the French are dealing with this nomination as acceptable. 

Now, attention has shifted to Parliament, accompanied by threats of imposing sanctions on those obstructing and impeding the process.
 
In this context, insiders say that Congress is the most stringent and enthusiastic (from both the Democratic and Republican parties) and is pushing for imposing sanctions. 
 
In the administration, there are two opinions: one suggests that it is possible to reach an understanding with Berri, especially since there is ongoing communication with him, particularly by US officials who have dealt with Berri on other issues, including the demarcation of maritime borders. 
 
The goal is to agree on a name other than Frangieh, with the condition that Berri ensures the opening of Parliament for the elections, especially since the opposition now has an internationally acceptable candidate (except for the rejection by the Shiite duo). Therefore, it is not expected that the doors of the council will remain closed.
 
On the other hand, there is an opinion within the US administration that the Europeans have enacted sanctions on those who obstruct the democratic process in Lebanon. 
 
These sanctions were imposed on the eve of the parliamentary elections. Therefore, there is also no objection to using them in the presidential elections.
 
There are consultations with the Europeans regarding Lebanon to utilize these laws because the US legislation does not include a legal mechanism that allows for sanctions against election obstructers. Therefore, efforts are being made to find legal mechanisms that enable their imposition.
 
Certainly, the focus has now shifted to the June 14 session, the consultations leading up to it and the new electoral equation that will follow.
 
 
 
 
 

Lebanon News

Press Highlights

US

Presidency

US

Lebanon

LBCI Next
The last chance: French envoy's visit and Lebanon's future
Download now the LBCI mobile app
To see the latest news, the latest daily programs in Lebanon and the world
Google Play
App Store
We use
cookies
We use cookies to make
your experience on this
website better.
Accept
Learn More