What happens in New York, stays in New York. After the meeting on Lebanon of the Group of Five (France, United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt), held Tuesday on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, echoes, sometimes contradictory, are being heard. A vagueness fueled by the fact that at the end of their meeting, the five powers did not publish a press release as during their previous meeting, last July in Doha. On the one hand, we are talking about attempts to surround the French approach and clip the wings of Paris’ special envoy, Jean-Yves Le Drian, who had nevertheless benefited from Saudi support during his last visit to Beirut. Another story suggests that what is happening What happened was not a disagreement, but rather a readjustment of priorities, between dialogue, the presidential election and the economic rescue plan.
Divergences or convergence?
Already, in terms of form, the New York meeting started on the wrong foot, since the foreign ministers of the four Paris partners did not agree to attend, instead delegating senior officials from their respective countries. “If the meeting had taken place at ministerial level, not only would the discussions have been more fruitful, but the participants would have found themselves faced with the obligation to publish a press release displaying their agreement, which did not seem possible on Tuesday,” notes a Western diplomatic source. .
Basically too, this meeting was the scene of a dispute between France and the United States, in what looks like a repeat of the Doha meeting. The Americans – who were the most firm – but also the Saudis insisted on the need to set a timetable at the French initiative and to sanction those responsible for the blockage. “Washington does not intend to let the French act alone on the Lebanese scene,” says an Arab diplomat. The Americans wish, through their position, to open the way for an intervention by Doha.” During his speech before the General Assembly, a few hours after the quintet meeting, the Emir of Qatar, Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, spoke of the Lebanese issue, regretting that “the suffering of the people continues due to political calculations » and insisting on “the need to find a solution to the presidential vacancy”. Enough to signal a new intervention by the emirate in the presidential file, with the blessing of Washington and Riyadh. “All that remains is to identify the right moment,” confirms the Arab diplomat.
Read also
Walid Jumblatt to the OLJ: “Some are playing with the Lebanese”
From then on, France’s role is called into question in diplomatic circles, since it no longer seems able to shape a way out of the crisis on its own. Especially since the assets that Paris had in Lebanon, namely its historical proximity to the Christians and the Hariri, alongside its ability to communicate with Hezbollah, are increasingly weakened. Christians reject the French approach, which they consider too conciliatory with the Shiite party, while Saad Hariri has withdrawn from political life. As for the Iranians, on whom the party of God depends, they dialogue with the Saudis and even the Americans. Qatar, which has been able to establish itself as an effective mediator between these capitals, but also between the Lebanese themselves, could therefore be led to play a more important role on the presidential file. This would come at the expense of the French, considered by their quintet partners to have failed to achieve a solution to the crisis. Contacted by L’Orient-Le Jour, a French diplomatic source denies this version of the facts. “There is a convergence of views between the members of the quintet. The Franco-Saudi sequence of Jean-Yves Le Drian’s last visit to Beirut clearly showed this. Some Lebanese actors are trying to create from scratch the perception of differences between international partners to better absolve themselves of their own responsibilities. And to assure: Jean-Yves Le Drian’s mission will continue, as long as the French authorities deem it useful. Press rumors insinuating that it will end soon are unfounded. »
But on the Lebanese side, we already have our eyes fixed on the visit to Beirut of the Qatari Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Mohammad ben Abdel Aziz al-Khulaifi, the date of which we are waiting for to be fixed (according to the latest information, it will take place beginning of October). Some officials even wanted this visit to take place as soon as the French envoy left Beirut last week. Because the conviction in Lebanon is more and more tenacious that after the failure of the French initiative, only Doha will be able to find common points between the different protagonists, despite their differences. This is all the more the case after the conclusion of an agreement between Washington and Tehran following the mediation of Qatar, involving the unfreezing of Iranian funds in exchange for the release of American citizens detained in Iran.
The dialogue, again and again
In the meantime, an inter-Lebanese dialogue could be conducted on two fronts. On the one hand by the French envoy who, upon his return to Beirut for a fourth visit in October, will hold bilateral meetings with representatives of the political blocs to discuss the procedure which should lead to an election and the expected program of the next president. And on the other, by the President of Parliament, Nabih Berry, who still wants to convene a dialogue in principle in October, despite the denial of the radical fringe of the opposition.
“The dialogue desired by Mr. Berry will last a maximum of 7 days and will be followed by an open electoral session where the rounds will follow one another until the election of a President of the Republic,” reiterates a close friend of the head of the legislature, while opponents criticize Nabih Berry for using ambiguous language to push them to accept his initiative without inviting the open session they are demanding. And the aforementioned official explained: “Nabih Berry’s proposal consists of the doors of Parliament being opened for a first round (86 votes necessary for the quorum and for the election). The session will not be adjourned and the rounds will follow one another, but the quorum will remain 86 votes even if 65 will be enough for an election in the second round. »
It is therefore to prevent a group of deputies from having recourse to what it considers to be its “constitutional right” to cause a lack of quorum during this session that the President of the House considers that dialogue is essential. . The talks could then lead to the emergence of a consensus candidacy or a list of candidates which will be decided in the ballot box during the promised session. “Nabih Berry is waiting for the majority of political blocs to respond favorably to the invitation,” says the person close to the legislative leader. And added: “It will depend on the Free Patriotic Movement, which has shown signs of openness. If he agrees to participate, the dialogue will then be conducted with those present. »
Some parties believe that after Le Drian’s fourth visit, and if an inter-Lebanese dialogue does indeed take place in Parliament, the Qataris could intervene to support this process, like what happened in Doha in 2008 Depending on national and international contacts, a compromise could then be possible. Others do not share this optimism and fear that the presidential election will be postponed until favorable regional conditions are met, notably an alignment between Iranian and American interests, Hezbollah included. At that point, the identity of the next president will become secondary…
What happens in New York, stays in New York. After the meeting on Lebanon of the Group of Five (France, United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt), held Tuesday on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, echoes, sometimes contradictory, are being heard. A vagueness fueled by the fact that at the end of their meeting, the five powers did not publish a press release…
2023-09-20 21:31:30
#Quintet #reunion #happened #York
