[ad_1]
In a further attempt to salvage the French initiative, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri was able to break the deadlock that hit Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Adeeb’s government formation process by proposing to help Adeeb appoint an independent Shiite minister to the Ministry of Finance, for once “without establishing a standard for the formation of governments in the Future.”
This proposal, which Hariri described as “drinking the poisoned cup”, showed his eagerness to meet in the middle of the road with the Shiite duo (Amal Movement and Hezbollah), who insist on the demand of the Ministry of Finance and the nomination of all the Shiite government ministers.
Immediately after Hariri announced his proposal, most analyzes were that it was the result of a direct French mandate, after Macron’s initiative reached a critical time-wasting stage.
While it was surprising that former prime ministers (Fouad Siniora, Najib Mikati and Tamam Salam) disavowed Hariri’s initiative and described it as “personal,” no official position has yet been issued regarding the Shiite duo, except for convey some positive atmospheres, based on research and consultation needed.
Will the “Shiite” duo adopt Hariri’s proposal?
Hariri’s proposal reveals that he changed his interpretation of the contents of the French initiative, after he adopted two basic principles for government formation, namely, portfolio rotation and the lack of political representation in government.
Regarding the strike position, it was issued yesterday Wednesday by the Presidency of the Republic in a statement in which it announced that the President of the Republic, Michel Aoun, “is concerned about the immediate formation of the government and the issuance of the decree of training in accordance with the designated prime minister. “
Soon, the French Foreign Ministry welcomed Hariri’s proposal to assign the Finance Ministry to a Shiite figure chosen by the designated president from among 10 names proposed by the Shiite duo.
In the context, the Parliamentarian of the Future Movement, Muhammad Hajjar, points out that Hariri’s proposal arose after his evaluation of a sensitive stage in which the country faces a fateful French opportunity to “break its international isolation and open the doors to it. to help, especially after the catastrophic explosion in the port of Beirut. “
Hajjar rejects, in a statement to Al-Jazeera Net, classifying Hariri’s proposal as a “concession”, and considers it an exceptional initiative that came to dissolve the French initiative and stop the blackmail to which it is being exposed internally and externally, ” without this meaning allowing the constitution to be circumvented. “
Hajjar also denies the French formula for direct payment of Hariri’s proposal, noting, however, that France’s direct contact with Hariri does not stop.
Macron’s initiative faces internal and external complications (Anadolu Agency)Role variation or distribution?
Regarding the position of former prime ministers, information from Al-Jazeera Net indicates that there is a discrepancy between the four pillars of the Presidents’ Club, and that Hariri’s proposal encountered opposition from his colleagues when it was presented to them, thus which proceeded alone.
While some believed that this “disparity” was a role-sharing process, Al-Hajjar simply said: “Some may describe Hariri’s proposal as political suicide, and the other heads of government have an opinion that we respect, but the priority is to save the French initiative before it is too late. “
For his part, the writer and political analyst Johnny Mounir considers that the difference in the position of the former prime ministers was logical, and that it arose from observations on the formal arrangement of Hariri’s proposal and not from an objection to its content.
He tells Al-Jazeera Net that this discrepancy is comforting for Hariri, “because if his initiative is unsuccessful, he can rely on his position to step back,” he said.
As for the writer and political analyst Radwan Aqil, he reveals that Hariri’s proposal was not new for the “Shiite duo.” Rather, the French president had previously told the speaker of parliament Nabih Berri in his last phone call with him, and it became a list of Shiite names to take over the financial portfolio held by stakeholders in France. and between My hand is a writer.
Aqeel describes Hariri’s proposal as a “quarter step”, while the “Shiite duo”, according to Aqil, rejects Adeeb’s intention to appoint any Shiite figure in the government without reference to them. Aqil told Al-Jazeera Net that despite turning the wheel of the French initiative, he revealed that Hariri is “the original chairman of the mission government, which negatively affects Adib’s mission,” he says.
Christian knot?
On the other hand, some forces saw that reminding the President of the Republic that he is interested in forming a government paves the way for interference in the appointment of Christian ministers, as well as the environment of the parliamentary bloc of the Free Patriotic Movement – headed by Gebran Bassil – he hinted that Hariri’s proposal constitutes a constitutional violation, considering that the designated prime minister is the one who chooses the ministers alone. .
In the context, May Khraish, vice president of the Free Patriotic Movement for Political Affairs, explains that the president of the Republic and the movement support any proposal that breaks the wall of stagnation in the French initiative, “as long as it is integrated with the constitutional texts, above all because the formation of the government requires the signature of the President of the Republic as an effective partner in the mandate and composition. ” And to the confidence of the parliamentary blocs “.
He told Al-Jazeera Net that Bassil’s current position is clear regarding his refusal to participate in the government, “but on the other hand, we do not accept the abolition of our popular and political representation as a counterweight in the country.”
Khreich notes that the current will not give parliamentary confidence to the government “unless it is productive, effective and reformist from its prime minister to its ministers.”
Here the obvious question appears, will the government be born by handing over the money bag to a Shiite figure who obtains the consent of both? In this context, Radwan Aqil believes that the government will not see the light solving this problem, and it is likely that the President of the Republic will refuse to sit idly by the selection of Christian names in the government, considering that his This statement indicates it, and “has implicitly accused Hariri of unconstitutional appropriation of the training process.”
This is confirmed by Johnny Mounir, who felt that Hariri’s proposal would move the government battle elsewhere. Pressure from Aoun and the National Movement to intervene in the training process in an effort to represent them in government is also likely to emerge. .
The political crisis in Lebanon is stalling despite the anniversary of the Beirut bombing approaching in its second (European) monthUS sanctions
Mounir comes to consider that the transfer of Aoun and his political team to the Hezbollah bank in the process of forming the government, may result in the US sanctions soon affecting Christian figures close to Aoun’s political team.
On the other hand, Radwan Aqil affirms that the insistence of the Shiite duo on representation in the government is the result of fear of the continuation of the series of sanctions, in addition to raising issues at the government table that are incompatible with the policy of the two , the first of which is the demarcation of the maritime borders between Lebanon and Israel.
And in light of the successive US sanctions, “the Shiite component in Lebanon has become more dynamic with its political and religious wings, due to its feeling of targeting and trying to restrain it externally and its internal opponents who found a way to adapt it in the sanctions” , according to Aqeel.
Observers do not hide that despite the importance of Hariri’s initiative to revive the French initiative, which was hesitant, it may have moved the attempts to form a government to a new square for the crisis that seems to be ravaging Lebanon to this day.
[ad_2]
