Countries of the World/COUNTRYS.BIN/dp/0215/02158.txt

Text File | 1991-06-25 | 40KB | 643 lines

$Unique_ID{COW02158}
$Pretitle{224}
$Title{Lebanon
Chapter 4A.   Government and Politics}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{As'ad AbuKhalil}
$Affiliation{HQ, Department of the Army}
$Subject{president
political
deputies
chamber
civil
lebanese
system
constitution
government
minister}
$Date{1987}
$Log{Three Major Sects*0215801.scf
}
Country:     Lebanon
Book:        Lebanon, A Country Study
Author:      As'ad AbuKhalil
Affiliation: HQ, Department of the Army
Date:        1987

Chapter 4A.   Government and Politics

[See Three Major Sects: A Muslim, A Druze and A Christian.]

     In late 1987, after more than a dozen years of civil strife during which
as many as 130,000 people may have died, Lebanese politics had become
synonymous with bloodshed, and political power had come to be equated with
firepower. Within this context, it was sometimes difficult to recall that
Lebanon was once considered by some to be a model of pluralistic democracy in
the Arab world.

     Despite the widespread erosion of law and order and the reduced
effectiveness of the central authorities, in 1987 some vestiges of the
traditional political system persisted. The president, as provided for in the
Constitution, had been elected by the legislature, or Chamber of Deputies. He
presided over a carefully selected cabinet, commanded the Lebanese Armed
Forces, and supervised the civil service. But at this point, much of the
resemblance between this framework and the pre-1975 Civil War national-level
political structure ceased. In 1987 the president controlled only a small
portion of the country. The members of the Chamber of Deputies had been
elected in 1972--as of 1987 the latest election--and some of the deputies no
longer even lived in Lebanon. Many of the traditional zuama(sing., zaim--see
Glossary) of the various sects who had formerly participated in Lebanon's many
cabinets were dead. The confessionally split Lebanese Armed Forces were only
the sixth or seventh most powerful military organization in the nation. And
the civil service, which still collected taxes and provided services to some
parts of the country, did so at greatly diminished levels.

     Lebanon's political traditions--including its internal
contradictions--can be traced back several centuries. Under Ottoman rule
(1516-1916) Lebanon's multisectarian character was already in evidence as
powerful Druze (see Glossary), Muslim, and Maronite (see Glossary) feudal
lords extended their control over certain tracts of land in Mount Lebanon (see
Glossary). They enjoyed a high degree of autonomy as long as taxes were paid
to the Ottoman authorities. Likewise, under the short period of Egyptian
control (1832-40), rule was relatively tolerant, both within the region and
toward outside powers. It was during this era that European penetration helped
Maronite Christians make gains against Druze landlords, and after the British
and the Ottoman Turks drove out the Egyptians, Druze-Maronite antipathy turned
violent. At the urging of the European powers, in 1842 the Ottoman Empire
divided Mount Lebanon administratively, creating a Christian district in the
north and an area under Druze control in the south. But this system, called
the Double Qaimaqamate, did not change the fact that portions of the various
populations were still integrated. For example, Maronite peasants worked for
Druze overlords. In 1860, in response to peasant revolts, Maronite- Druze
animosities again boiled over. Although both sides suffered, about 10,000
Maronites were massacred at the hands of the Druzes. As a result, at the
instigation of the European powers, the Ottomans reunited the two sections of
Mount Lebanon, this time under a single, non- Lebanese, Christian mutasarrif
(governor), appointed by the Ottoman Sultar. The mutasarrif was assisted by a
multisectarian council.

 After World War I and the defeat of the Ottomans by the Allied Powers, the
League of Nations granted France mandate authority over Greater Syria (see
Glossary), an area that included present-day Lebanon. As a result of Lebanon's
years under the French Mandate (1920-43), the Constitution enacted in 1926 is
fashioned after that of the French Third Republic. Article 95, however, is
unique in that it provides for "balanced" confessional (see Glossary)
representation in government. In 1943 the provisions of this article were
spelled out more clearly by unwritten agreements between Maronite and Sunni
(see Glossary) leaders. These agreements came to be known as the National
Pact. The balancing advocated in the National Pact was meant to be provisional
and was to be discarded as the nation moved away from confessionalism (see
Glossary).

     This movement, however, never occurred; in fact, in the years between the
National Pact and the start of the 1975 Civil War, sectarianism became even
more entrenched, and the principle of balancing, which created multiple power
centers, frequently inhibited the political process. Basic philosophical
differences on political outlook often separated the various parties.
Bickering among elites was common, not only between Christians and Muslims but
also among sects within each religious group. Also during this period, the
political system of zuama clientelism, whereby powerful heads of families
(similar to the feudal warlords of the Ottoman era) who wielded considerable
political influence and dispensed patronage, became institutionalized. As a
consequence, loyalty to subnational entities, such as family or sect, took
precedence over allegiance to the state.

     Other problems impeded the smooth operation of government. Chief among
them was that the National Pact was based on the 1932 census, which enumerated
Christians (including even those who had emigrated) to Muslims in a
six-to-five ratio. Because this census was never updated officially, the
growing number of Muslims, especially Shias (see Glossary), was not taken into
account, thus giving Christians disproportionate political power. Many
observers believe that it was the inability of Lebanon's leaders to agree on a
new power-sharing formula in line with demographic realities that led to the
1975 Civil War.

     Although it no longer monopolized the means of coercion, the government
survived this conflict. The destruction and brutality wrought by both sides
were catastrophic, but, except for a few small extremist groups, none of the
armed militias demanded the abolition of the state or the abrogation of the
Constitution; instead, many of them called for meaningful reform.

     To some extent, the state and governmental institutions were able to
survive through the direct intervention of external powers. In 1976 Ilyas
Sarkis was elected president while much of the country was subject to Syrian
presence. Then, in 1982 Bashir Jumayyil (also seen as Gemayel) was elected
president, largely under pressure from Israel, whose forces occupied most of
southern Lebanon and Beirut. Because of the presence of a variety of armed
militias throughout the country and the resulting "cantonization" of the
state, in 1987 the term government had relevance only within the context of
sectarian politics.

The basis of Government

     The Constitution and National Pact together form the framework of
Lebanon's parliamentary democracy. The Constitution provides for three
branches of government: an executive, a legislature, and an independent
judiciary. The president of the republic, who appoints the prime minister, is
elected by the Chamber of Deputies, the legislative body. Although this system
resembles that of a Western democracy, because of the National Pact and its
legitimization in the Constitution, the president, ministers, and deputies act
as members of their respective confessional communities and not as at-large
representatives (see Lebanese Confessional "Societies," ch. 2).

The Constitution

     In the early 1920s, the League of Nations requested that the French
Mandate authorities devise a law for Lebanon in cooperation with the native
leaders and in harmony with