Reasons and consequences of Hariri’s withdrawal from forming a government in Lebanon
NourNews – The main reason for Hariri’s failure to form a government can be considered the monopoly, westernization and disregard of the Lebanese sectarian and national structure, which will lead to the formation of a new phase of foreign interference in the internal affairs of Lebanon.
Saad Hariri announced his resignation from the mission, after nearly 9 months of accepting the mission to form a Lebanese cabinet, in order to mark a new round of unrest in the country by giving the wrong address as to why the resignation took place.
Hariri claims that his emphasis on the need to adhere to certain principles in the selection of ministers and the opposition of President Michel Aoun, with the proposed composition, is the reason for his resignation, while a deep look at the process of 9 months of Hariri activities to form a cabinet reveals other points.
The governing structure in Lebanon is a tribal structure, and the formation of the government is based on the same principle and, of course, the Doha agreement of 2008 between the political currents, but a review of Hariri’s cabinet shows that he did not follow any of these principles and could lay the groundwork. New tribal crises in Lebanon.
On the other hand; Political logic dictated that the person in charge of forming the government should consult and coordinate with the internal currents and form a government with the general support of the existing capacities, while Hariri traveled to France, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Egypt, etc., more than domestic consultations, he sought for the satisfaction and the support of a foreign actors.
This plunged Lebanon into external ambitions and led to the disregard of the plans of internal currents such as Hezbollah and the Amal movement to resolve the Lebanese economic crisis, which resulted in the escalation of the crisis in Lebanon.
Another notable point in the Lebanese equation, especially after last year’s explosion in the port of Beirut, is the intensification of foreign competition for dominance over Lebanon. On the one hand, France, which seeks to return to West Asia, tried to use the explosion of Beirut and the political and economic crisis for its long-term goals.
On the other hand, the United States, along with its regional partners such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, sought to use Lebanon as a platform to defeat rivals such as France.
This rivalry, due to the irresponsibility of the United States and France and their addiction to sanctions and pressure to achieve their goals, led to the suspension of their alleged financial support to Lebanon and the imposition of new sanctions against Hezbollah.
Hariri’s pro-Western approach not only effectively crippled Lebanon’s economic and banking structure, but also prevented the implementation of alternative schemes, such as fuel supply from non-Arab and Western countries, to break the people’s resistance to foreign colonization by creating a stalemate in the country.
Base on this; The main reason for Hariri’s failure to form a government can be considered the monopoly, westernization and disregard of the Lebanese sectarian and national structure, which led to the formation of a new phase of foreign interference in internal affairs, including the implementation of sanctions against Lebanon, claiming to resolve the political crisis and internationalize the case of formation a government will be a what happened in the case of the assassination of Rafic Hariri.
by Mohammad Ghaderi
