Lebanese Forces Opt Out of New Government, Citing Reform Failures and Quota System
In a bold move that underscores deepening political tensions, the Lebanese Forces have decided not to participate in the new government formation led by Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam. This decision, confirmed by informed sources to Libanon Debayette, comes as a protest against what the Forces describe as a continuation of the flawed mechanisms that have driven Lebanon to its current state of collapse.
The sources emphasize that the issue is not merely about the number or nature of ministries but the very process of government formation. Despite promises of reform following the presidential elections, the logic of quotas continues to dominate, with no serious indicators of implementing the reforms outlined in the presidential departmentS speech.
The Ministry of Finance: A Flashpoint of Contention
Table of Contents
One of the most contentious issues revolves around the Ministry of Finance. The sources highlight that the insistence of the “Shiite duo” on maintaining control over this ministry contradicts the principle of rotation and reform. “How can the financial reforms that president Joseph Aoun and president Nawaf Salam talk about be achieved, in light of the continuation of the Ministry of Finance in the hands of the political team itself, which covered financial abuses over the past years?” the sources ask.
The Ministry of Finance has long been a focal point of waste and corruption, with billions of dollars disappearing due to questionable financial decisions. The sources argue that appointing an independent minister, unaffiliated with any political party, is essential for meaningful reform. However, the current approach suggests a continuation of the status quo, raising doubts about the new government’s ability to enact essential changes.
Exclusion of Party ministers: A Targeted Move
Another notable factor in the Lebanese Forces’ decision is the insistence on excluding party ministers from the ministerial formation.The sources describe this condition as “unjustified” and “an insult to all my forces fighters.” They argue that this move unfairly targets the Forces while other political parties are treated differently.The Forces view party work as a legitimate means of achieving power and implementing a political project, not merely a way to remain in opposition. This exclusion, they believe, undermines their role in shaping executive decisions and perpetuates the imbalance in Lebanon’s political landscape.
A Government of Settlements, Not Reform
Based on these concerns, the lebanese Forces have solidified their decision to abstain from the new government. While they await the official proclamation,the sources indicate that the current government formation process does not reflect the balance of political forces or signal a move toward reform. instead, it appears to be an extension of the logic of settlements and bargains that have brought Lebanon to its current crisis.
Key Points at a Glance
| Issue | Details |
|——————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Government Formation | Dominated by quota system,lacks reform indicators |
| Ministry of Finance | Controlled by the “Shiite duo,” seen as a barrier to financial reform |
| Exclusion of Party ministers| Deemed unjustified and targeted against the Lebanese Forces |
| Overall Assessment | Government formation reflects settlements,not meaningful reform |
As Lebanon grapples with its ongoing crisis,the decision of the Lebanese Forces to abstain from the new government underscores the deep-rooted challenges in achieving genuine reform. The path forward remains uncertain, with the Forces leaving the door open for potential developments while maintaining their stance against a system they believe has failed the nation.
Lebanese Forces’ Decision to Abstain from Government: An Expert Analysis on Reform Failures and the Quota System
In a bold move that underscores deepening political tensions, the Lebanese Forces have decided not to participate in the new government formation led by prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam. This decision, confirmed by informed sources to libanon debayette, comes as a protest against what the Forces describe as a continuation of the flawed mechanisms that have driven Lebanon to its current state of collapse. to better understand the implications of this decision, we spoke with Dr. Samir Haddad, a political analyst and expert on Lebanese governance.
Government Formation and the Quota System
Senior Editor: Dr. Haddad,the Lebanese Forces have cited the dominance of the quota system in government formation as a key reason for their abstention. Could you explain how this system has hindered meaningful reform in Lebanon?
Dr. Samir Haddad: Absolutely. The quota system, or muhasasa,has long been a cornerstone of Lebanese politics. It ensures that key positions are distributed among the major sects and political blocs, frequently enough based on power-sharing agreements rather than merit or competence. While it was initially designed to maintain balance and prevent conflict, it has become a notable barrier to reform. Instead of addressing systemic issues like corruption and economic mismanagement, government formation becomes a game of settling scores and appeasing political factions. This lack of genuine reform indicators is precisely why the Lebanese Forces have opted out.
The Ministry of Finance: A Barrier to Reform
Senior Editor: The Ministry of Finance has been a particular point of contention. Can you elaborate on why control over this ministry is so significant?
Dr. Samir Haddad: The Ministry of Finance is arguably the most critical ministry in any government,especially in a country like Lebanon,which is facing a severe financial crisis. Control over this ministry means control over fiscal policies, budgets, and economic reforms. The insistence of the “Shiite duo”—Hezbollah and Amal—on maintaining control over this ministry is seen as a direct impediment to reform. It raises serious questions about the government’s ability to implement the financial reforms outlined in President joseph Aoun and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam’s plans. Without an independent, non-partisan minister, the ministry is likely to continue operating under the same opaque and corrupt practices that have characterized it for years.
Exclusion of Party Ministers: A Targeted Approach?
Senior Editor: The Lebanese Forces have also criticized the exclusion of party ministers from the government formation.Why is this such a sensitive issue?
Dr. Samir Haddad: The exclusion of party ministers is particularly troubling for the Lebanese Forces because it appears to be a targeted move against them. While other political parties are allowed to nominate their members for ministerial positions,the Lebanese Forces are effectively sidelined. This undermines their legitimacy as a political entity and diminishes their role in shaping executive decisions. The Forces view party work as a legitimate means of achieving power and implementing their political project, not just as a way to remain in opposition. This exclusion perpetuates the imbalance in Lebanon’s political landscape and further entrenches the existing power structures.
Overall Assessment: A Government of Settlements
Senior Editor: Based on these factors, how would you assess the current government formation process?
Dr. Samir Haddad: Regrettably,the current government formation process reflects the logic of settlements and bargains rather than a genuine commitment to reform. It is not rooted in the balance of political forces or the needs of the Lebanese people but rather in backroom deals and power-sharing agreements. The Lebanese Forces’ decision to abstain is a clear statement that they view this process as a continuation of the same flawed system that has brought Lebanon to its knees. While the Forces have left the door open for potential developments, their stance underscores the deep-rooted challenges in achieving meaningful reform.
Key Takeaways
Senior Editor: To wrap up, what are the main takeaways from the Lebanese Forces’ decision and its implications for Lebanon’s future?
Dr. Samir Haddad: The Lebanese Forces’ abstention highlights the pervasive issues within Lebanon’s political system, particularly the dominance of the quota system, the lack of genuine reform in critical ministries like the Ministry of Finance, and the exclusion of key political actors. Until these systemic issues are addressed, Lebanon will continue to struggle with governance and economic stability. The path forward remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: meaningful reform cannot be achieved through the same mechanisms that have failed the country for decades.
