The message behind US Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Lebanon - which coincides with a vacant presidency and with Syrian presidential elections - is not to tamper with stability, to speed up the Lebanese presidential election process and to hold onto the Taif Accords.
US Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Beirut comes within the context of Western diplomatic activity which is progressively intensifying in light of the presidential vacancy in Lebanon. The visit is significant in terms of its timing as Kerry interrupted his European tour in which he is accompanying US President Barack Obama from Poland to Paris to attend the celebrations commemorating the 70th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy.
According to sources familiar with the purpose of the visit, Kerry’s trip to Beirut is meant to put pressure in order to hold the presidential election. It is a view that Kerry had expressed during his call to former Lebanese President Michel Suleiman a few days ago.
According to these sources, Washington wants to highlight its growing interest in Lebanon as all eyes are focused on the US-Iranian dialogue and on reconfiguring Iran’s relationship with the Gulf states, and primarily Saudi Arabia. The visit by the US secretary of state, coinciding with Lebanon’s presidential vacancy, contains a number of messages.
Kerry wants to reassure the Lebanese generally, and Christians particularly, that Washington is keen on protecting the presidential post and that it will spare no effort to ensure that the elections will take place as soon as possible. The visit also sends a message to all the countries involved in the Lebanese elections that the situation in Lebanon is governed by a historical agreement that cannot be tampered with, namely the Taif Accords. As a matter of fact, the US State Department issued a statement a few months ago stressing its commitment to this agreement. At this critical stage, the US is also concerned with the situation and developments in the Golan Heights in Syria and with stability in south Lebanon where the Lebanese-Israeli border is governed by United Nations resolution 1701.
According to the same sources another reason for the visit, which also coincides with the Syrian presidential elections, is to send a message from Beirut, only kilometers away from Damascus, to the international and regional powers that supported the elections. The message purports that repudiating the essence of the Geneva agreement by holding elections in Syria and the West’s response by receiving Syrian National Coalition President Ahmad al-Jarba have nothing to do with Lebanon, do not entangle it in the new developments of the Syrian crisis and do not turn the country into an arena for exchanging messages.
There are three concerns that the US wants to highlight besides the question of the presidential election and the other aforementioned issues.
First, Washington does not want Lebanon, at this sensitive stage, to turn into a lawless arena. Meaning no one is allowed to undermine Lebanon’s security and stability under any pretext. Not a day goes by without US diplomatic and military circles expressing their support for the Lebanese army and their willingness to offer logistical, technical and intelligence experience and assistance to maintain security, prevent destabilization and combat terrorism of all kinds. This issue is not only repeated periodically, it is a red line that reflects on more than one level US keenness on Lebanese security and stability.
Second, despite its concern with the presidential election, the US is distancing itself from any deals and arrangements that local parties are making. Up til this point, Washington has not publicly discussed names of specific candidates. It is observing intently, inquiring and asking questions about the specifications needed for this phase. It is also monitoring the Lebanese dialogues going on between Beirut, Paris and Saudi Arabia. Washington does not want any party to jump into a political adventure whose outcome is unknown, which anyone can do to push developments in a certain direction in favor of a specific side.
Third, if the US dialogue with Saudi Arabia - where changes have taken place that Washington played a role in - manifested itself in forming the Lebanese government, dialogue with Iran focuses mostly on maintaining stability in the South and keeping control of the situation under the auspices of UN resolution 1701. There has been no leaks suggesting that Washington will discuss with Tehran Hezbollah’s participation in the war in Syria.
In its dialogues with Saudi Arabia and Iran, Washington insists that Lebanon is not part of the negotiation agenda regarding its future as is the case with Syria, where a war is raging and discussions about the fate of its regime are ongoing. Or as is the case with Iraq, where managing the conflict between Iraqis is hard and has rendered no results. The future of Lebanon has become clear and established as one realizes that the Taif Accords and the system based on it are non-negotiable and any discussion regarding Lebanon deals with issues like security, the economy, government formation and currently filling the presidential post.
The Lebanese situation, in this sense, does not require a broad Iranian-Saudi understanding. All it requires is a small-scale arrangement isolated from the path of the broad negotiations addressing issues from the security of the Gulf to the fate of Syria. The threshold set to maintain the situation in Lebanon is quite clear. After all, when world capitals, where decisions are made, want at a decisive moment to look for settlements for the countries of the region, they devise models resembling the Lebanese settlement.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
RELATED
RELATED
- باسيل رفض لقاء كيري
- أسد الأمة كيري يستنجد بحزب الله بري وعون يتفاهمان السفير روسي استراتيجي
- Kerry in Beirut: Electing New President ’Badly Needed’
- International patronage to protect Lebanon and its political system
- Lebanon: US watching presidential elections closely, no favored candidate yet
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment