Lebanon’s Political Quotas: A Catalyst for State Collapse, Says jamil Al-Sayyed
in a scathing critique of Lebanon’s political system, Representative Taif Agreement, which has been used to translate the charter into quotas as its inception. “It has been the custom since the Taif Agreement to translate the Charter into quotas, whether in the Syrian era or after it in the era of sovereignty, freedom, and independence until today,” he wrote.
The consequences, according to Al-Sayyed, have been dire. “The result was the collapse of the state and the impoverishment and emigration of the Lebanese,” he stated, emphasizing that “balance is a national necessity and quotas are a national harm.”
Today, the focus of this conflict has shifted to the Ministry of Finance, which has become a battleground for old and new bids over state-building. Al-Sayyed stressed that the “correct charter is when the sects represent their best in the government,” adding that they “must be ashamed if they are represented with their worst.”
He concluded with a call for integrity in governance: “Whoever is armed with knowledge, morals, and the law, and whose obsession is the interest of the country and the people, represents all the sects and all the Lebanese in whatever government.”
| Key Points | Details |
|—————-|————-|
| charter | Balanced national representation of sects in power.|
| Quotas | Political representation of sectarian leaders in power. |
| Historical Context | Rooted in the Taif Agreement, practiced since the Syrian era. |
| Consequences | State collapse, impoverishment, and mass emigration. |
| Current Focus | Ministry of Finance as the center of conflict. |
Al-Sayyed’s critique highlights the urgent need for reform in Lebanon’s political system, where sectarian quotas have long been a source of division and dysfunction. His words serve as a stark reminder of the challenges facing the nation as it seeks to rebuild and move forward.
Lebanon’s Political quotas: A catalyst for state Collapse, Says Jamil Al-Sayyed
Table of Contents
In a recent post on the “X” platform, Lebanese Representative Jamil Al-Sayyed criticized the sectarian power-sharing framework in Lebanon, tracing it’s roots to the Taif Agreement. He argued that the system of quotas has led to state collapse, impoverishment, and mass emigration.To unpack this complex issue, we sat down with Dr. Farah El-Hassan, a political analyst and expert on Middle Eastern governance, for an in-depth discussion.
The Charter vs. Quotas: A Ancient Outlook
Senior editor: Dr. El-Hassan, Jamil Al-Sayyed distinguishes between the “charter” and the “quotas” in lebanon’s political system.Could you elaborate on this distinction and its historical context?
Dr.Farah El-Hassan: Absolutely. The “charter,” as Al-sayyed defines it, refers to a balanced national portrayal of sects in power. This concept was central to the Taif Agreement of 1989, which aimed to end Lebanon’s civil war by ensuring equal political participation across religious communities. However, over time, this principle was distorted into “quotas,” where sectarian leaders dominate political representation. This practice, which began during the Syrian era, has perpetuated a system where loyalty to sectarian factions often outweighs national interest.
The Consequences of Sectarian Quotas
Senior Editor: al-Sayyed argues that this system has led to the collapse of the state and widespread impoverishment. How has this played out in practice?
Dr. Farah El-Hassan: The consequences have been devastating. Sectarian quotas have created a fragmented political landscape where governance is often paralyzed by infighting. This has hindered the state’s ability to address economic crises, such as the ongoing financial collapse. The result is widespread poverty, a brain drain as skilled professionals emigrate, and a loss of trust in public institutions. Al-Sayyed rightly points out that these quotas, far from ensuring balance, have become a source of national harm.
The Ministry of Finance: A New Battleground
Senior Editor: Al-Sayyed highlighted the Ministry of Finance as a focal point of conflict. Why has this ministry become so contentious?
Dr. Farah El-Hassan: The Ministry of Finance is crucial because it controls the nation’s purse strings.in a country grappling with economic collapse, control over this ministry represents power over key decisions like budget allocations, debt management, and international aid. However, it has also become a battleground for sectarian interests, with various factions vying for control to secure resources for their own communities. This undermines cohesive state-building and exacerbates the existing crisis.
A Call for Reform and Integrity
Senior Editor: Al-Sayyed concluded with a call for integrity in governance. What would it take to move beyond sectarian quotas and build a more effective system?
Dr. Farah El-Hassan: Reform is undeniably challenging but essential. First, there needs to be a shift towards merit-based appointments rather than sectarian quotas. This means selecting leaders based on their expertise, ethics, and commitment to the national interest rather than their religious or political affiliations.Second, there must be robust measures to combat corruption and ensure accountability. political elites must prioritize the common good over narrow sectarian interests.Al-Sayyed’s call for integrity is a crucial step in this direction,but it requires collective will and sustained effort.
