The Lebanese parliament will convene at 17:00 today (25 May) to elect Army General Michel Suleiman as president of the country. The election will end six months of uncertainty over the position, since Emile Lahoud resigned in November 2007.
His election is, rightly so, being punted as a remarkable achievement for the Lebanese polity which has been at odds since the end of the Israeli-Hezbollah war in August 2006. In 2006, the pro-Syrian anti-government anti-Western Hezbollah accused the ruling majority (you guessed it pro-Western anti-Syrian) of colluding with the Israelis and began a string of civil campaings, including an opposition tent city in central Beirut, to amongst other things demand a veto power in the cabinet. They have now received that. This fact seems to have been completely ignored by elements of the world press. Hezbollah is the real winner here. They have a puppet president, have further eroded the credibility of the majority in parliament, have strengthened their military position following their successful show of force in April and May of this year and are set to make further gains should their momentum not be stopped.
Lebanon has not reached a happy tipping point. Its emergence may have serious implications for the region and must be addressed as a matter of urgency. How one does that is debatable. Hezbollah meanwhile will claim that this emergence is the will of the people, was done through legitimate means and can be fully justified. I had a look at the results of the most recent parliamentary elections held in 2005. They are quite revealing.
Pro-Syrian (Hezbollah and allied) 35 seats.
Anti-Syrian (Future Movement) 72 seats.
Enough said.
