What Berri's about-face means for Lebanon

Now is not the time for political manoeuvring. We need leaders capable of putting Lebanon's interest first.

What Berri's about-face means for Lebanon

When Prime Minister Najib Miktati, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri met not too long ago, a glimmer of hope emerged after the latter declared that the government would consider discussing UN Resolution 1701. As for UN Resolution 1559 (which calls for the disbanding of all foreign and domestic militias), Berri neither endorsed it nor directly opposed it.

Berri's declaration was made even though he was fully aware that even the Taif Accords, which ended Lebanon's gruelling 15-year civil war, also called for the same thing. The Taif Accords stipulated that all militias had to hand over their weapons to the Lebanese army six months after the agreement was signed.

But Berri's 32 years as Lebanon's Parliament Speaker show he is a master of political manoeuvring and survival.

Shortlived hope

Reports from the meeting, however, highlighted his optimism and apparent flexibility in addressing Lebanon's pressing issues, particularly the election of a president—a highly contentious matter—which briefly gave Lebanese hope that a political solution could be reached to extricate the country from the current war.

But after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited Beirut a few days ago and declared that the fate of Lebanon would be tied to the fate of Gaza, all government efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the current conflict came to a grinding halt. Berri is well aware of the massive blow Israel has dealt to his Shiite allies in Hezbollah by taking out its top-brass leadership, including its secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah, in only a matter of weeks, which makes his about-face all the more troubling.

For his part, Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary-General Naim Qassem expressed support for Berri's efforts and said the ultimate goal would be working toward a ceasefire. Importantly, he did not make clear whether a ceasefire in Lebanon would be tied to a ceasefire in Gaza, nor did he bring up UN Resolution 1701.

Lebanese government efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the current conflict came to a grinding halt after the visit of Iran's foreign minister

Gambling with Lebanese lives

But what is clear from the developments that have unfolded in the past few days is that Iran has chosen to go to war with Israel via Lebanon. Although Tehran doesn't want a direct confrontation with Tel Aviv, it is willing to gamble with the lives of the Lebanese people even if it means thousands killed, millions displaced, and the destruction of infrastructure across the country. 

In an interesting development, Israeli media reported moves by Tel Aviv to actually link the Lebanon and Gaza fronts, but to its own advantage. According to the report, Mossad chief David Barnea had discussed with CIA Director William Burns the possibility of "capitalising on the Israeli army's recent successes against Hezbollah in the north to pressure Hamas into negotiating a hostage deal", which essentially means Israel could agree to a ceasefire in Lebanon in exchange for the hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.

The hope that Hezbollah will prioritise Lebanon over Iran may seem like wishful thinking, but Lebanese officials—especially Berri—still have a fleeting opportunity to salvage what remains of the country and its people. As Lebanon faces one of its darkest times and grave danger hovers over the lives of its citizens, politicians need to act decisively to rescue the country from a looming catastrophe.

Now is not the time for political manoeuvring. We need leaders capable of putting Lebanon's interest first.

font change