Complete Story of Cabinet Formation… Who Won The Battle?
09/11/2009
There's no winner and no loser in the new cabinet lineup…
This is the "expression" adopted by all politicians, from the loyalty and the opposition, at the end of a "long struggle" that finally produced a national-unity cabinet…
But is it true? Does really the new cabinet reflect a "national product" without winners and losers? Can Lebanese say that their country is the only winner with the birth of the new government? And if so, where did the "slogans" raised during months of "hard negotiations" go?
The whole story started right after the June 7 parliamentary elections, when the March 14 got the majority of the parliamentary seats and therefore, MP Saad Hariri was appointed as Prime Minister-Designate.
It was on June 27 that the "struggle" to "agree" on a general "formula" for the unity government officially started… The "negotiations" occurred at the same time the Arab rapprochement was preparing itself to return to the headlines… Indeed, the Arab press started publishing news about a potential Saudi-Syrian summit that would be the main push for the PM-Designate to advance in his mission despite the American commitment to form a government that "respects the outcome of the parliamentary elections."
Negotiations started, and a "magical solution" was reached: the 15-10-5 formula, granting ten ministers to the opposition and five others to the President while the remaining 15 go to the majority, thus rejecting the guaranteeing third for the opposition as well as the absolute majority for the loyalty.
Suddenly, everything seemed to change and a first "deadlock" was reached when the head of the Democratic Gathering MP Walid Jumblatt announced his "coup" against his so-called "allies" in the March 14 bloc. The Progressive Socialist Party chief's "coup" threatened the whole formula for a moment, and MP Saad Hariri took his first "vacation" abroad to "think"…
Anyway, the road of agreement on the formula seemed to be very easy when compared to the negotiations on portfolios and names that will take months without witnessing a "happy ending."
Indeed, the March 14 Christians worked hard to achieve through this battle what they failed to achieve during the elections. Thus, they convinced the Prime Minister-Designate to "cut out" what they called "ministerial standards" that seemed to exclusively target the Free Patriotic Movement.
Among the mentioned "standards" or maybe "slogans" were the following principles:
- rejecting the principle of appointing election losers as ministers, in an attempt to reject the re-appointment of FPM Minister Gebran Bassil in the government;
- rejecting the idea of granting the Free Patriotic Movement and its head MP Michel Aoun with any "sovereign portfolio" despite the fact that Aoun's Change and Reform bloc comprises 27 MPs, including 19 Maronite ones and is therefore the main representative of Lebanese Christians;
- rejecting the idea that the Free Patriotic Movement maintains the Telecommunications portfolio despite the reforms it has started to achieve in it;
- undermining the Change and Reform bloc's Maronite share in the interest of other less representative parties in the Christian scene such as the Lebanese Forces and the Phalange party;
- undermining the Change and Reform bloc's general share in a way that it doesn't exceed four seats including only three portfolios;
- adopting the principle of "rotation in ministries" exclusively with the Free Patriotic Movement portfolios.
The mentioned "standards" or "slogans" were believed to be a main obstacle preventing the cabinet formation. Its direct result was "tension" in ties between Aoun and Hariri.
President Michel Sleiman found himself obliged to interfere and therefore he joined the two men at his Presidential Palace on July 31 when a meeting took place but didn't produce a government.
Only a few days later, and specifically on August 7, the PM-Designate submitted to President Michel Sleiman a cabinet lineup that was believed by his opponents to be a "booby trapped" one especially that the opposition's ministers were not chosen by their parties!
Unified, the opposition declared its refusal for Hariri's "suspicious" move, urging the PM-Designate, convinced of his inability to form a government without the opposition's approval, to present his apology to the President for failing to form the government on August 10.
Swiftly, Hariri was re-charged with forming the government but with a "weak majority" of only 73 lawmakers from the March 14 bloc, especially after the March 14 Christians' positions against the partnership government provoked Speaker Nabih Berri who decided to deprive Hariri from his bloc's votes.
Once again, many first-class events took place one after another, directly influencing the Prime Minister-Designate in his mission. The "top event" was, per-excellence, the Saudi-Syrian summit that took place in the Syrian capital Damascus. Yet, the Lebanese national-unity government wasn't formed.
Here, MP Sleiman Franjieh interfered as a "mediator" representing the opposition and played a major role in approaching all opinions. And finally between one "up" and another "down," the opposition "succeeded" in facilitating the "happy ending".
But what about the "standards" created by the March 14 bloc? Were they reflected in the final lineup?
An accurate look at the final lineup gives the answer:
- the principle of rejecting the appointment of election losers was rejected and Gebran Bassil was re-appointed as Minister;
- the principle of rejecting granting essential portfolios to election losers was also rejected with Gebran Bassil appointed as Energy Minister;
- the "impossibility" of granting the Free Patriotic Movement with the Telecommunications portfolio was also rejected and General Michel Aoun named Charbel Nahhas at the head of the ministry;
- General Aoun also kept the Energy portfolio despite loyalty efforts to get it;
- Aoun got five ministers including four portfolios;
- Aoun got three Maronite ministers out of six ministers representing the Maronites.
After all this sum-up, is it true that there is no "winner" in the cabinet formation process?
09/11/2009
There's no winner and no loser in the new cabinet lineup…
This is the "expression" adopted by all politicians, from the loyalty and the opposition, at the end of a "long struggle" that finally produced a national-unity cabinet…
But is it true? Does really the new cabinet reflect a "national product" without winners and losers? Can Lebanese say that their country is the only winner with the birth of the new government? And if so, where did the "slogans" raised during months of "hard negotiations" go?
The whole story started right after the June 7 parliamentary elections, when the March 14 got the majority of the parliamentary seats and therefore, MP Saad Hariri was appointed as Prime Minister-Designate.
It was on June 27 that the "struggle" to "agree" on a general "formula" for the unity government officially started… The "negotiations" occurred at the same time the Arab rapprochement was preparing itself to return to the headlines… Indeed, the Arab press started publishing news about a potential Saudi-Syrian summit that would be the main push for the PM-Designate to advance in his mission despite the American commitment to form a government that "respects the outcome of the parliamentary elections."
Negotiations started, and a "magical solution" was reached: the 15-10-5 formula, granting ten ministers to the opposition and five others to the President while the remaining 15 go to the majority, thus rejecting the guaranteeing third for the opposition as well as the absolute majority for the loyalty.
Suddenly, everything seemed to change and a first "deadlock" was reached when the head of the Democratic Gathering MP Walid Jumblatt announced his "coup" against his so-called "allies" in the March 14 bloc. The Progressive Socialist Party chief's "coup" threatened the whole formula for a moment, and MP Saad Hariri took his first "vacation" abroad to "think"…
Anyway, the road of agreement on the formula seemed to be very easy when compared to the negotiations on portfolios and names that will take months without witnessing a "happy ending."
Indeed, the March 14 Christians worked hard to achieve through this battle what they failed to achieve during the elections. Thus, they convinced the Prime Minister-Designate to "cut out" what they called "ministerial standards" that seemed to exclusively target the Free Patriotic Movement.
Among the mentioned "standards" or maybe "slogans" were the following principles:
- rejecting the principle of appointing election losers as ministers, in an attempt to reject the re-appointment of FPM Minister Gebran Bassil in the government;
- rejecting the idea of granting the Free Patriotic Movement and its head MP Michel Aoun with any "sovereign portfolio" despite the fact that Aoun's Change and Reform bloc comprises 27 MPs, including 19 Maronite ones and is therefore the main representative of Lebanese Christians;
- rejecting the idea that the Free Patriotic Movement maintains the Telecommunications portfolio despite the reforms it has started to achieve in it;
- undermining the Change and Reform bloc's Maronite share in the interest of other less representative parties in the Christian scene such as the Lebanese Forces and the Phalange party;
- undermining the Change and Reform bloc's general share in a way that it doesn't exceed four seats including only three portfolios;
- adopting the principle of "rotation in ministries" exclusively with the Free Patriotic Movement portfolios.
The mentioned "standards" or "slogans" were believed to be a main obstacle preventing the cabinet formation. Its direct result was "tension" in ties between Aoun and Hariri.
President Michel Sleiman found himself obliged to interfere and therefore he joined the two men at his Presidential Palace on July 31 when a meeting took place but didn't produce a government.
Only a few days later, and specifically on August 7, the PM-Designate submitted to President Michel Sleiman a cabinet lineup that was believed by his opponents to be a "booby trapped" one especially that the opposition's ministers were not chosen by their parties!
Unified, the opposition declared its refusal for Hariri's "suspicious" move, urging the PM-Designate, convinced of his inability to form a government without the opposition's approval, to present his apology to the President for failing to form the government on August 10.
Swiftly, Hariri was re-charged with forming the government but with a "weak majority" of only 73 lawmakers from the March 14 bloc, especially after the March 14 Christians' positions against the partnership government provoked Speaker Nabih Berri who decided to deprive Hariri from his bloc's votes.
Once again, many first-class events took place one after another, directly influencing the Prime Minister-Designate in his mission. The "top event" was, per-excellence, the Saudi-Syrian summit that took place in the Syrian capital Damascus. Yet, the Lebanese national-unity government wasn't formed.
Here, MP Sleiman Franjieh interfered as a "mediator" representing the opposition and played a major role in approaching all opinions. And finally between one "up" and another "down," the opposition "succeeded" in facilitating the "happy ending".
But what about the "standards" created by the March 14 bloc? Were they reflected in the final lineup?
An accurate look at the final lineup gives the answer:
- the principle of rejecting the appointment of election losers was rejected and Gebran Bassil was re-appointed as Minister;
- the principle of rejecting granting essential portfolios to election losers was also rejected with Gebran Bassil appointed as Energy Minister;
- the "impossibility" of granting the Free Patriotic Movement with the Telecommunications portfolio was also rejected and General Michel Aoun named Charbel Nahhas at the head of the ministry;
- General Aoun also kept the Energy portfolio despite loyalty efforts to get it;
- Aoun got five ministers including four portfolios;
- Aoun got three Maronite ministers out of six ministers representing the Maronites.
After all this sum-up, is it true that there is no "winner" in the cabinet formation process?
No comments:
Post a Comment