It seems that the crises in Lebanon never end, and thinking about crisis solutions proves to be futile. Political disagreements have increased, and political parties in Lebanon have become detrimental to the country’s stability. There are those who seek chaos, and the vacancy of the presidential seat has become increasingly significant. The Lebanese Parliament has failed to elect a president in more than 12 sessions.

For over a month, France has been trying to find a solution to the escalating crisis in Lebanon. Paris announced the appointment of its former Foreign Minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, as a special envoy to Beirut, which is facing a severe political and economic crisis requiring comprehensive and urgent reforms, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Attempting to reach a consensus solution

According to informed sources, Le Drian’s mission, with his extensive experience in crisis management and knowledge of the dynamics between the factions in the Arab country, was to find a consensus and effective solution to the crisis that has been escalating since the Beirut port explosion in August 2020.

After the convergence of the opposition forces and the Free Patriotic Movement in nominating the head of the International Monetary Fund, Jihad Azour, for the presidency with the aim of overthrowing the head of the Marada Movement, Suleiman Frangieh, whom Paris supports, this represents a challenge to the latter as a candidate supported by Hezbollah.

The failure of the French initiative

Recently, the Quintet (United States, France, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar) met in Doha to issue a confrontational statement that served as an obituary for the French initiative, nearly ending the American mandate given to Paris in the presidential file. It may also declare the end of the mission of French presidential envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian.

The statement was loaded with threats of sanctions and a list of conditions for the Lebanese. While Beirut was awaiting the outcome of the second meeting of the Quintet and the results of Le Drian’s talks in Riyadh, the statement included threats of sanctions and a list of conditions for the Lebanese, indicating a discussion of specific options regarding taking action against those hindering progress in the election of a new president for the country.

It emphasized the need for Lebanon to elect a president who embodies integrity, unites the nation, prioritizes the country’s interests, and forms a broad and comprehensive coalition to implement fundamental economic reforms, particularly those recommended by the International Monetary Fund.

An incompatible approach

In this context, Lebanese political researcher Tony Hobeich says that the French approach to the Lebanese issue was not entirely compatible with the internal reality. Paris prioritized its interests in companies in Iran and Iraq and acted accordingly in addressing the crisis in Lebanon.

He added that Paris opened the door for negotiations with all political factions in dealing with a crisis of this nature, which is natural, but it disregarded an important reality on the domestic scene: Hezbollah cannot be equated with all political forces.

He explained that Hezbollah in Lebanon does not seek to serve Lebanese interests but rather Iranian interests. Therefore, the failure of the French initiative, which attempted multiple negotiations with the party, is evident.

He continued: It is clear here that Hezbollah’s insistence on its candidate and its rejection of any compromise in this matter is a repetition of the scene during the presidential elections of Michel Aoun in 2018, when the Parliament was closed and a formula was imposed: either Michel Aoun becomes president or there is a vacancy.

He emphasized that acknowledging that Lebanon is under Iranian occupation is the gateway to effectively addressing the complex crisis. Without that, unfortunately, the international community will not be able to reach a real solution to the situation that Lebanon has reached.