The Effects of Consociational Democracy
By Vanessa Zuabi, Staff Writer

Paris, France - Lebanon’s confessional division has been a source of conflict in the country since before its creation, fueled further by regional and international intervention. France, Israel, Syria, Iran and the United States have been financial and political supporters, not of Lebanon, but of its different sects, fueling internal division within the country. Lebanon’s elite, welcomed and still welcome such intervention from France, the United States, Syria and Iran in order to maintain their own high political and economic positions. Support for such leaders today, not only upholds the corrupt patron/clientele system that has become characteristic in Lebanon, but allows international actors to profit from it.

Many Lebanese elite relations with international powers began before and during the French Mandate (1918-1943) whereby the French established a strong colonial and socio-political influence within the country. The French Mandate was crucial in the solidification of the sectarian nature of the Lebanese state. French political and economic support of Catholic Maronites and their suppression of Arab nationalist supporters, namely the Muslim populations of Lebanon, divided the country even more. The French formed close bonds with the Maronite Catholics of Lebanon. However, Lebanese elite, particularly Maronite and Sunni elite economically profited from close ties with French, engaging in trade and business relations. Maronite Catholics identified themselves more with Western Christianity, ignored Beirut and Tripoli as central parts, disregarded the future state of Lebanon and the Lebanese national identity at this time, as well. The French mandate authorities encouraged and exploited the loyalty to France and the split between Muslims (Beirut and Tripoli) and Christians (Mount Lebanon). The French privileged their Catholic supporters because they spoke more French and comprised more of the administrators. Catholic ministries and schools flourished, but many from the Christian Mountain were exploited and poor. Only particular elite families from all sects began to dominate trade and intermediary roles.

The leverage of French-backed Lebanese elite has allowed many of the same families to dominate and maintain power in the country. It has continually been to their benefit to maintain a divided confessional political system within the country, allowing them to maintain control and power within their sects.

France continues its strong relations with Lebanon’s elite as a means of maintaining its dwindling influence in the region. Jacques Chirac’s close relation with former PM Rafik Hariri, who was thought to be his personal financer, enhanced France’s already genial relations with Lebanon. Currently, France has used its history and strong political ties with figures, such as Saed Hariri, to continue to exert influence over the country’s internal political battles. Following Jacques Chirac’s plummet in popularity following the voters’ rejection of the European Constitution in 2005, Chirac used his political leverage in Lebanon to regain support by intervening in the Israeli/Hizbullah war this past summer 2006. As a result, he has been able to reestablish fragile relations with the United States and is a primary political leader in international affairs towards the Middle East as a whole. His assignment of 2000 French peacekeeping troops in the southern Lebanon further boosted his popularity as a man with an international vision and diplomatic mind frame. The United States too has joined forces with France to condemn Hizbullah through UN Resolution 1559 and through their support  of the “pro-democratic” Lebanese government.

The history of French influence in Lebanon teaches an important lesson. Support for Lebanon continues to be, merely, support for the elite politicians that benefit from such relations with the West. Neither the United States, nor France nor Syria, nor any other regional and international power, has the interest of Lebanon in mind. While millions rally behind either the “March 14 movement” or the “March 8 movement,” keep this in mind: since Lebanon’s beginnings, it has been plagued by division, exacerbated further by foreign powers that have profited off this division. This is the history of Lebanon’s civil and political strife. Continuing to remain divided and allowing this division to be fueled and influenced by any foreign powers will produce more unrest. Whether one is in the March 14 movement or the March 8 movement, both sides are guilty of maintaining a corrupt elite driven system in Lebanon supported by international powers that only benefit from Lebanon’s civil division. Lebanon and the Lebanese people will never win this way.

[Top]