6/08/09

The western-leaning March 14th coalition pulled off a surprising victory in Lebanon’s parliamentary elections this weekend, successfully defending its seats from an opposition movement that included Hezbollah. March 14’s victory offers an undeniable benefit to the Obama administration, as a Hezbollah-led parliament would have complicated the President’s Middle East agenda, in particular his efforts to advance the peace process. But March 14th’s success is not a cure-all. Lebanon now faces the complicated process of establishing a government, and the Obama administration must resist the impulse to declare victory and move on to other pressing affairs. Lebanon will continue to pose serious challenges: the risk of instability during parliamentary jockeying, long term political paralysis, the still-strong role of Hezbollah, and the continued prospect of outside interference in the country’s internal affairs. The Obama administration will need to remain focused and engaged with Lebanon and should continue to support efforts that build capacity of the Lebanese state. Additionally, engagement with Lebanon is a vital part of a broader, comprehensive strategy for the Middle East.

Pro-Western coalition claims victory in Lebanon Parliamentary elections. Lebanon’s western-leaning March 14th coalition held on to a thin majority over the March 8th opposition in the country’s parliamentary elections. According to the New York Times, “[p]reliminary results reported on Lebanese television showed the alliance, known as the March 14 coalition, had managed to preserve its majority in Parliament. If those results are confirmed, they would represent a significant and unexpected defeat for Hezbollah and its allies, Iran and Syria. Most polls had showed a tight race, but one in which the Hezbollah-led group would win.” The Daily Star reports that the March 8th opposition admitted defeat, “‘We've lost the election,’ a senior opposition source, who declined to be identified, told Reuters. ‘We accept the result as the will of the people.’ ‘We'll go back to the way we were,’ the source added.” Associated Press reports the official results, “The interior minister announced the final results for the 128 parliamentary seats from all 26 districts at a news conference. The tally showed the winning coalition with 68 seats versus 57 for the Hezbollah-led alliance. Three seats went to independents. The allocation was largely unchanged from the outgoing legislature, ensuring that the same disputes will continue to roil the political scene.” The New York Times goes on to say that “[t]he tentative victory may have been aided by nearly unprecedented turnout. The preliminary results showed that about 55 percent of the 3.26 million registered voters cast ballots.” NPR goes on to say, “Turnout nationwide was about 52.3 percent up from 45.8 percent in 2005.” In addition, the LA Times explains, "[p]reliminary results cited by local news media showed that several closely watched Christian districts went against [Hezbollah-allied Christian leader Michel] Aoun, who remains a divisive figure." [NY Times, 6/08/09. The Daily Star, 6/08/09. NPR, 6/8/09. Associated Press, 6/8/09. LA Times, 6/08/09]

Despite March 14th’s victory, Lebanon still faces considerable challenges. The March 14th Coalition’s victory is a positive outcome to Lebanon’s elections, but the country still faces considerable obstacles:

• Thin majority for March 14th coalition once again raises the prospect of political paralysis. The AP raised the question of Lebanon’s paralytic political dynamics, saying that the election’s results “would almost replicate the deadlock that existed in the outgoing parliament, in which the pro-Western bloc had 70 seats and an alliance of Hezbollah and other Shiite and Christian factions had 58,” indicating a possibility for future deadlock. [AP, 6/08/09]
• Hezbollah retains ability to influence – or disrupt – Lebanese political system. The election did little to diminish the status of Hezbollah, which draws its strength from Lebanon’s Shiite community and remains a powerful, and potentially disruptive force in Lebanese politics. The New York Times elaborated: “Though the Hezbollah-led challengers appeared to lose, Hezbollah itself — a Shiite political, social and military organization that is officially regarded by the United States and Israel as a terrorist group — will continue to be one of Lebanon’s most powerful political forces.” “The pro-Western coalition – which is largely made up of Lebanon’s Sunni, Druze, and portions of the Christian population – had vowed not to give Hezbollah and its allies a blocking minority in the new government if they won,” reported the AP, raising the prospect of future clashing. [NY Times, 6/08/09. AP, 6/08/09]
• Lebanon remains prone to interference from surrounding countries, including Syria and Iran. CFR adjunct Senior Fellow Mohammed Bazzi described a third potential challenge – Lebanon’s long history of outside interference, specifically from neighboring Syria and nearby Iran: “I think the Syrians are constantly trying to exert larger influence, with greater influence in Lebanon... And while they don't have the extent of the influence they had when they had all their troops inside Lebanon, certainly politically they're stronger than they were in April and May 2005 following their withdrawal.” Bazzi also suggested that the Iranians might be tempted to interfere in Lebanese politics following a March 14th victory, particularly if the potential negotiations with the Obama administration hit a wall. [CFR Conference Call, 6/05/09]
• Post-election jockeying has potential to cause unrest. Despite a successful election, until the government is formed there is still the potential for instability resulting from political maneuvering. As CFR expert Mohammed Bazzi makes clear, much rides on the political maneuvering following the election itself: “the actual outcome of the election - the actual distribution of seats - becomes less important than the post-election period, and in that post-election period we're going to see maneuvering that will commence right after June 7 and that maneuvering will determine the makeup of three things: the next cabinet, the next Prime Minister of Lebanon, and the potential veto powers of whichever side ends up being the opposition after the election.” In particular, “Negotiations over the distribution of cabinet positions in a new government will test the country's ability to satisfy Hezbollah's expected demands [in the post-election negotiations], while also acknowledging the outcome of the election,” says the New York Times. [CFR Conference Call, 6/05/09. NY Times, 6/08/09]

Obama administration must tread cautiously during post-election period, staying focused on Lebanon as part of its comprehensive strategy for the Middle East. The March 14th coalition’s victory is beneficial for the Obama administration, especially as the President “renews a push for Arab-Israeli peace,” reported the Washington Post. Paul Salem, Director of the Carnegie Middle East Center, observed in an AP report: “Certainly it goes in a positive direction in the sense that it doesn't shake the boat. It reassures the Arab countries, Europe, and the U.S. that there will be no dramatic change of policy.” But despite the benefit conferred to the Administration’s Middle East agenda, there is still a risk that Lebanon backslides with far-reaching consequences. Steven Cook, Middle East expert at CFR, predicted: “I think you're going to see more of the same and more of an American effort to, as they say, build the capacity of the Lebanese state, in particular the Lebanese military. But again, the Lebanese situation is so fractured and can change so much, so quickly, I think that the Obama administration has to tread very carefully in not setting itself up for a variety of consequences that will be-it will regret down the road.” As Special Envoy George Mitchell begins yet another visit to the region, including a possible stop in Syria, the Wall Street Journal reports, “The push back of Hezbollah is seen as providing President Barack Obama more diplomatic space to pursue his high-profile Arab-Israeli peace initiative. It could also lend Mr. Obama more time to pursue his diplomatic outreach toward Tehran.” As the President articulated this morning, the U.S. must move forward with the “sincere hope that the next government will continue along the path towards building a sovereign, independent and stable Lebanon,” encouraging the new government to “place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party,” as the “the best means to secure a sovereign and prosperous Lebanon.” [AP, Washington Post, 6/08/09. AP, 6/08/09. CFR Conference Call, 6/05/09. AP, 6/05/09. WSJ, 6/08/09. President Obama, 6/08/09]

What We’re Reading

The pro-Western March 14th coalition won Lebanon’s parliamentary elections.

North Korea convicted the two captured U.S. journalists of “hostile acts” and sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor. The U.S. considers returning North Korea to the list of state-sponsors of terrorism and intercepting North Korean ships.

Center-right, far-right and anti-immigration parties made gains in Europe’s parliamentary elections. Voter turnout was the lowest ever. The results are particularly bad news for embattled British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Erratic Afghan forces pose a challenge to U.S. goals.

Harsh talk escalates as the Iranian presidential election approaches. The Washington Post profiles main challenger Mir Hussein Moussauvi.

Israeli troops killed four Palestinian militants attempting to cross the border into Israel from Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that he will make a major speech on Middle East peace next week.

A bus bombing killed at least nine in a Shiite area of Baghdad.

Military spending increased 4% worldwide in 2008 to a new record high. The U.S. remains the largest spender at 58% of the world’s total, but China has reduced the gap.

Iraqi security forces arrested 5 American civilians in the killing of a contractor last month.

China and the U.S. seek agreement on climate change and greenhouse gases.

Suspected drug traffickers battled Mexican soldiers in Acapulco, leaving 18 dead.

Police opened fire on protestors in Indian-controlled Kashmir.

Commentary of the Day

Henry Kissinger writes that all major world powers must come together to check nuclear proliferation and North Korea.

The New York Times says that protecting Afghan civilians must become the measure of U.S. success in Afghanistan.

Bill Powell explains why North Korea’s sentencing of the U.S. journalists “isn’t shocking.”