
Why Jordan and Egypt Are Critical to Trump’s Gaza Proposal
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – On Tuesday, with Jordan’s King Abdullah II at his side, President Donald Trump exuded confidence that the Arab world will […] More
OPINION — If 2024 ended with “cautious optimism” about Syria, in the wake of that country’s ouster of the Assad regime, 2025 may be beginning with a similar degree of hope for the political change that has come to its neighbor Lebanon. Taken together, the changes in these countries offer reason for a similar “cautious optimism” across the broader Middle East.
General Joseph Aoun won a majority vote in the 128-member parliament to become the new president of Lebanon. This election is significant for at least three reasons: the military is the only trusted national institution in Lebanon; General Aoun does not belong to any one of the dozens of political parties and movements in the country; and the election showed the diminishing political and military influence and capability of Hezbollah, following Israel’s attacks in the past six months.
Aoun’s standing and the changing political realities in Lebanon have afforded him the opportunity to bring on a new head of government as well. Within five days of taking office, the new president named Nawaf Salam, a renowned international jurist, as Lebanon’s new prime minister – and he, too, won a majority vote in the parliament. The speed in selecting a president and a prime minister is unprecedented in the recent political history of Lebanon.
This relatively swift election indicates that the major political groupings and parties in Lebanon, including Hezbollah, seem to be moving away from war and destruction. The new political and military realities in Lebanon, Syria and regionally in the past year were not lost on Lebanon’s parliamentarians as they chose Aoun and Salam.
For over a quarter of a century, Hezbollah was recognized as Lebanon’s most potent political force. But such influence was nonexistent in the recent voting for president and prime minister, thanks to Hezbollah’s diminishing stature.
Several new realities have driven the election of Lebanon’s top two leaders, including the fall of the Assad regime, the military humiliation of Iran by Israel, the reduced Russian military presence in Syria, and of course Hezbollah’s dwindling influence.
In recent years, no major political development would have occurred in Lebanon without Hezbollah’s approval. The country did not have a president for two years because Hezbollah did not approve the presidential candidates that were put up for a vote in the parliament.
In the recent past, Western powers, including the United States, France, the United Kingdom, as well as many Arab states have viewed Hezbollah as the key power broker in Lebanon and dealt with it gingerly and cautiously. Yet these same powers played a key role in the election of the new president and prime minister with little deference to Hezbollah.
During the parliamentary session, Hezbollah representatives went so far as to complain that their party was being marginalized in the selection of the country’s two top leaders.
Everyone needs a good nightcap. Ours happens to come in the form of a M-F newsletter that provides the best way to unwind while staying up to speed on national security. (And this Nightcap promises no hangover or weight gain.) Sign up today.
Challenges remain
Despite my optimism, I am still wary of the enormous challenges that are facing Lebanon’s new political leadership.
For one thing, it’s worth remembering that although the military has been recently boosted by the election of General Aoun and the support it has received from the United States, the new government cannot ignore the fact that Hezbollah remains a potent political party and a relatively capable military militia force in the dahia and other suburbs of Beirut. and particularly in south Lebanon.
Meanwhile, the country’s complex sectarian political structure, sectarian tensions, the weak Lebanese state, and the distrust of state institutions are perhaps the most immediate daunting challenges. Add to that the country’s economic paralysis and endemic corruption.
If President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam hope to steer the country toward a hopeful future, they will simultaneously have to address other looming challenges including the million-plus Syrian refugees in Lebanon, the country’s relations with Syria’s new leadership, Israel’s presence in the south and the repositioning of the Lebanese forces on the border with Israel that used to be managed by Hezbollah despite the 2006 UN Security Council Resolution 1701.
On the Lebanon-Syria front, the new leadership has already initiated talks with the post-Assad Syrian leaders regarding the Syrian refugees and the long-term strategic relations between the two neighbors. The Syrian rebel leader Ahmad al-Sharaa has stated, following the meeting with Lebanese officials, that the election of President Aoun ushers in “stable conditions in Lebanon and an opportunity to build a positive relationship” between the two countries.
Sectarian groupings and fealties in Lebanon remain a vexing problem. The Lebanese political system was founded on a sectarian formula bringing together under the Lebanese state all the different religious groups—Maronite Christians, Sunni Muslims, Shia Muslims, Druze, and secular groups as well as Armenians, and Kurds.
Parliamentary representation of the relatively larger parties range from eight members to 19. These include the Lebanese Forces, the Free Patriotic Movement, the Amal Movement, Hezbollah, the Progressive Socialist Party, and the Future Movement.
Since the 1950s, tensions among these sectarian groupings have often broken out into open hostilities. In the 1970s and 1980s, the country witnessed a bloody civil war that killed thousands of people. The civil war resulted in a continuation of sectarian politics supposedly under Syria’s watchful eye. Simply, the formula states that the president must be a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of the parliament a Shia Muslim.
Corruption has been an outgrowth of sectarianism. Sectarian leaders in charge of the different government departments and ministries, including the ports and transportation, banking and investment, public services and utilities have first and foremost tended to serve their own sects, not the state of Lebanon. Their constituents and followers usually adhere to sectarian religious and political ideologies and only secondarily identify with Lebanese nationalism or statehood.
For years, the government has tacitly ceded maintaining the stability and safety of the border region with Israel to Hezbollah, in the belief that the Party of God was their guardian along that border. Of course, this is no longer the case.
Join Cipher Brief Experts for a real-time conversation on defining the gray zone and the impact on U.S. national security led by Dr. Michael Vickers, former Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, and Dave Pitts, former Assistant Director of CIA for South and Central Asia, on Wednesday, January 22 at 1:30p ET.
Subscriber+ Members, check your email for an invitation to register for this exclusive conversation. Not a member? We can help with that.
The path forward and the role of the United States
Despite the enormity of the challenges, it is possible for the new Lebanese leadership to chart a hopeful trajectory for the country. The United States should become engaged in Lebanon diplomatically and economically but not militarily. The last thing the Lebanese army would need at this stage is more weapons and war fighting equipment. Yet, Washington could play a crucial role in helping Lebanon move forward. The key function of the Lebanese fighting forces is to help the civilian government maintain domestic stability, not to fight cross border wars.
The new Lebanese government should take several steps to help move the country forward.
This optimistic scenario will have a chance when the Lebanese people begin to view their government as transparent, honest, accountable, and concerned about the citizenry. As a Lebanese friend told me recently, “What we need is jobs, jobs, jobs—and access to our money in the banks. We are not interested in war with Israel or with anyone else.”
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
Related Articles
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – On Tuesday, with Jordan’s King Abdullah II at his side, President Donald Trump exuded confidence that the Arab world will […] More
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT – As President Donald Trump doubles down on his idea of a U.S. takeover of Gaza, Arab governments are also doubling […] More
As the second Trump Administration took office, it found a Middle East landscape that had been transformed dramatically in the last year alone. Nowhere is […] More
EXPERT INTERVIEW / PERSPECTIVE – The Middle East has changed dramatically over the past four years, creating both extraordinary challenges and opportunities for the region […] More
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT — Might a Gaza peace agreement bring benefit beyond the besieged Gaza Strip? That’s the tantalizing hope expressed by several U.S. officials […] More
EXPERT INTERVIEWS — The final days of the Biden Administration are coinciding with an all-out push to reach a ceasefire-for-hostage deal in Gaza. And in a […] More
Search