They say the more things change, the more they remain the same. The political families dominating today’s parliamentary elections (and all previous polls) in Lebanon are a case in point. In the ballot, 538 candidates will slug it out for 128 seats. All major government positions in the country are allocated according to sect, including the president, who should be a Christian, the prime minister, a Sunni, and the parliament speaker, a Shiite. Parliament is divided equally between Christians and Muslims.
The last parliamentary vote was conducted almost a decade ago, in 2009. Since then, there have been two collapsed governments, and lawmakers have been nice to themselves, extending their terms twice, using the pretext of the insecurity wrought by the war in neighbouring Syria.
Lebanon’s politics has been completely dominated by old patronage networks of Big Men from all sects, and their families and allies. Lebanon is a democracy that has perfected the concept of political dynasties. There were hopes that a new election law agreed on in 2017 would create avenues through which novice political candidates and independents could try to get a piece of the country’s parliamentary pie. The law reorganises Lebanon’s electoral districts, consolidating 23 of them into 15, and awarding seats by voter share rather than the winner-takes-all system. It also allowed Lebanese expatriates to vote abroad for the first time.
However, old traditions of patronage will be hard to break down. This is because political big hitters in Lebanon — mostly former warlords and sectarian leaders — hold sway through client-list networks. They control state institutions, and through these, they provide government jobs and services to their constituents who, in turn, feel indebted to them. At the macro level, the election is expected to be a test for the western-backed prime minister, Sa’ad Hariri, and his Iran-backed militant opponent, Hezbollah. The militia is looking to tighten its already vice-like grip on the country and expand its presence in the parliament. It shows no indication of ending its policies that are not in the interest of Lebanon, and only serve the geopolitical ambitions of the regime in Tehran.
Lebanon is a microcosm of the Middle East, highly susceptible to regional upheaval. Until its leaders learn to work in the interest of the country, and not act as proxies of foreign powers, and until the Lebanese themselves learn to prize civil society over the patronage system, it will be business as usual there.
