Elections are held for a purpose, a very crucial one I might add. They form an opportunity for the citizens to tell their representatives where they stand regarding the various policies and positions that are facing the nation. People go into the voting booth in order to make their voices heard. If the politicians are to take it upon themselves to form coalitions and implement policies that would negate what the majority has voted for then that makes a sham of the whole electoral process. That is simply why the PM designate, Sa’ad Hariri, is not free to trade off the electoral victory that his coalition won for the sake of satisfying the onerous conditions set by Michel Aoun.
Michel Aoun is free to make any demands that he wishes to make but he is not in a position to dictate the formation of the cabinet. If his demands are not met then he is free to refuse to join the proposed cabinet. This is the way that it is and the way it has always been. The junior party is within its own rights to specify conditions under which it will become an active member of a partnership but it is never in a position to insist on its being included in the proposed partnership.
Mr. Hariri has wasted enough time in his attempt at creating a “national unity” cabinet that represents all political gatherings. For a variety of reasons his efforts have not born fruits yet and he is under a moral obligation to the Lebanese citizens, his allies and the Lebanese constitution to stop this charade. If Mr. Hariri is convinced that the bloc of Michel Aoun ought to be part of the cabinet then all what he has to do is to make him an offer that he cannot refuse. Once a just offer is made then Michel Aoun will have to stop placing his impossible conditions and decide whether he is willing to accept what is offered to him or whether he wishes to continue his obstructive behavior. Mr. Hariri is under no obligation whatsoever to be magnanimous but since he has chosen to do so then he must make general Aoun a “take it or leave it offer”. The rules of rational behavior would indicate that Michel Aoun would have no choice but to find a way to join a government that he is totally opposed to. But if the parties were rational then would we have been in this morass?
Apodcast of the above may be heard at: ramblings11.mypodcast.com
Posts
3 comments:
Your argument will not work because Aoun is only a front for Hezbollah.
aoun or not, i'm a strong supporter of forming a majority-only cabinet, especially after a 2month-deadlock. but realistically, as long as opposition wlll have weapons, majority will not be in a position to make "take it or leave it" offers. M14 fears HA arms and repetition of May 7 events. opposition is exploiting its leverage to weaken hariri and force him to accept all their requests.
Iglina,
I am for a majority cabinet and totally opposed to the idea of forming a national unity government especially due to the fact that the major two groups have opposing ideologies. But since Sa'ad Hariri and most of his coalition are in favour of a national unity cabinet they should not allow Aoun to dictate.
The majority have never acted as winners since HA and its allies have been masters at creating obstacles to prevent the others from governing. This does not excuse the failures of March14 but is an attempt to minimize the damage which has been partially self inflicted.
Post a Comment