A BLOG BY THE UNITED KINGDOM'S AMBASSADOR TO LEBANON,
H.E. TOM FLETCHER
I
visited the Presidential Palace Saturday to thank President Michel Sleiman for his leadership.
Throughout his mandate he has led Lebanon with
great dignity and wisdom, and worked tirelessly for unity and consensus. He has
now left the building.
In
theory, a new president should have been arriving, making the last adjustments
to his or her inauguration speech, setting out a vision for the future of the
country, deciding how to implement his or her manifesto. This should have been
be a moment of democratic renewal, hope and unity.
Instead
the chair is empty.
I’d
like to make an apology. We built our support for the election on the idea that
if we helped to remove external obstacles Lebanese leaders could pick a
president made in Lebanon, on time. Yet sadly the campaign has been “No, You
Can’t,” not “Yes, We Can.” We were wrong.
Lebanon
needs a president to take this country forward. To provide the balance its
institutions require. To confront massive humanitarian, economic and political
challenges. To lead much needed dialogue, as President Sleiman has worked so
hard to do. Lebanon needs a president chosen because of what he or she can
offer the country, not what they offer regional or local allies.
The
international community needs a president too, as a partner for the support we
want to give for stability. We need someone on the other side of the table.
In
recent weeks, we’ve been asking Lebanese citizens what they want from their
next president. It’s not a scientific poll, but we have spoken to people from
different parts of the country, Tripoli to
Tyre, Shoueifat to Chtaura. Now that the
chair in Baabda is empty, here
– in their words – is what they have told us is their manifesto.
“We
want security. We need continued action to prevent car bombs and sectarian
clashes. We need a strong Army and police service. We want to have confidence
that the government and international community have a strong plan to handle
the pressures created by hosting so many Syrian refugees.
We
want neutrality. We have had enough of other people’s wars.
We
want justice. We are fed up with lack of equality under the rule of law. We
deserve to have reliable courts and an end to protection of the corrupt. Our
politicians should be accountable to the citizens of Lebanon, not to unelected
leaders. We want a constitutional settlement that protects our right to be
different, but does not define us by it.
We
want opportunity. Our kids need the right education to build this country. We
need reliable 24/7 power to run our homes and businesses. We want to have
confidence that future oil and gas revenue will be invested for the benefit of
future generations, not a few. We think more power should be decentralized to
local levels, so we can take greater control of our own lives. We need our
youth and our diaspora to feel that Lebanon is their project too. We want our
country back.”
I
don’t know who’ll be the next president. That is a question for Lebanon. There
is no magic international fix – it is a dangerous illusion to wait for one
rather than taking the tough decisions necessary.
For
now, it is vital that Lebanon’s leaders let the state institutions keep
functioning. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. Lebanon has come through
tough times before, and – with the right spirit of responsibility and
compromise – can come through this.
The
failure to elect a Lebanese president is not a failure of the Lebanese people
themselves. It is not the fault of the millions of Lebanese working so hard
every day against the odds. We must ensure that they do not pay the price for
it.
So
the U.K. will continue our effort to get
textbooks to every child in Lebanon, to give the Army the ability to keep the
war outside Lebanon’s borders, to build a professional and trusted police
service, to ensure that Lebanon is not left alone to deal with the refugee
crisis, and to do the business that our two economies badly need. And we will
continue to hope for a leader who can promise, and deliver, the security,
justice and opportunity that the Lebanese people want.
Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2014/May-28/257949-an-apology-and-a-lebanese-manifesto.ashx#ixzz330toYRmu
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
COMMENTS
Sorry, Ambassador Fletcher. No one can deny your goodwill and your deep
interest in Lebanon, for which we shall always remain deeply grateful. Still,
we realize, after carefully reading your manifesto, how diplomatically you have
omitted and brilliantly sidestepped the main issue that is responsible for most
of our miseries in Lebanon, the latest of them, but not the least, being the current
void at the top of the pyramid.
Allow us to call things by their true names, Mr. Ambassador. Security,
neutrality, justice and even opportunity, are not God given rights. The
Lebanese citizens have been wrongly led to believe that they are entitled to
them, no matter what, just because they happen to be born in this country. It
is, in fact, such misconception that lies at the root of most of our problems
in Lebanon.
What the citizens and the Authorities in our country fail to perceive is
that these are not rights but rewards.
They are rewards to the State Authority for treating all its citizens
fairly and without discrimination and favoritism. They are reward to the
citizens for obeying the rules and behaving accordingly. They are rewards to
all of us, for sticking together, in the face of adversity, whether in times of
war or peace.
If we make, in all sincerity, our “examination of conscience”, can we
declare, without blushing, that we have fulfilled these obligations? And here I
am equally addressing the citizens and the Authorities.
If we do not enjoy security, neutrality, justice and opportunity, it is
simply because the Authorities and the citizens have never worked openly hand
in hand to achieve them. Each partner has played by his own rules with the
results that we witness nowadays.
I shall go so far as saying that, if the country is presently split in
two main political blocs that do not converse with each other, both are equally
to blame there, because they refuse to enter into an open and frank dialogue.
And if such a large chasm separates the citizens from the Authorities, the
cause can be undeniably attributed to the mutual suspicion and lack of trust
that have never ceased to linger between them. Each side is playing at who can
best cheat the other, and they are both keeping all the cards close to their
chests.
Nobody is playing by the rules, Mr. Ambassador, so why should we be
surprised at what is befalling us? But, you may ask me, Mr. Ambassador: what is
the way out of this dilemma, and what can we do to help there?
Kindly allow me to suggest that you and your colleagues in the European
Union can do a lot in that domain, Mr. Ambassador. I have some concrete
proposals in this respect and all that I am asking for is to be permitted to
present these suggestions at your convenience
Respectfully yours,
George Sabat (ACMA)
