I completely agree with this analysis.

If we should have learned anything about Michel Aoun in the last two years is that the Presidency is his number one priority. His immense desire and love for power is illustrated in both the fact that he claims to represent the whole Christian community and that HE and only HE is entitled to the Presidency. Also that in his aspiration to become President he was even willing to break away from the original FPM political program and pre-summer 2005 ideals in his bid to become President.

This is why today the opposition has a predicament. Why should Aoun continue to support them and risk a further decline in his political support base among the Christians, predominantly among the sect he claims to represent, if his payment for the sacrifice he is making is going to be met. I think its actually a predicament for Michel Aoun as well. Just like Michael Young said in one of his articles, Aoun can potentially be king-maker, but will never be king.

I believe Michel Aoun’s greatest move would be to reassess his long-term political objectives, and the future of the country if a consensus candidate was elected. I think he’ll find that in the long-run if he is seen as the king-maker that made a March 14 candidate President king, then he might just be hailed as a liberator. He would get back all the support he lost in the last two years, and he would definitely have a hand in picking more than half the christian ministers in cabinet.

But in Lebanon an outcome like this is extremely far fetched. The status quo defined by the slow decay of the country will prevail. Choosing an indecisive President with no real views on anything will likely be the outcome. And as usual instead of going one way or the other with policy, political and economic agenda and reform etc. we will go nowhere just to keep everyone at a safe and equal dissatisfaction from the status quo.

Who do you think benefits from that kind of outcome and status quo?

honestly did you see how the guy couldnt keep his head striaght while he was speaking with Marcel Ghanem on Kalam al nas, also watch the way he was sitting is that a possible future president, he was sitting like a gangster one hand in his pocket and while the he was on television, he is digusting.

“”I believe Michel Aoun’s greatest move would be to reassess his long-term political objectives, and the future of the country if a consensus candidate was elected.”"

First – one would have to believe that Aoun has “long term objectives” — his objectives have always been for him and at his age, they can be nothing but short term.
The FPM movement was and is just a vehicle for his goal of the chair.

One of the interesting things I’ve noticed is that the “warlord” Geagea fully understands about being a “Kingmaker”. Aoun had many chances to be a “hero” and he let them all go .. It is doubtful he will change now.
It was clear on Jan 23 that this “opposition” was a failure and he lost his biggest chance right then. He could have pulled out and he might even have been able to talk his way into the chair with enough mea culpas.

Paul Fares for president!

leo,

I agree. It does appear strange. And when I first started following Lebanese politics I was also flabbergasted at why leaders could change positions, have contrary positions, dismiss facts etc. and still not lose popular support.

The problem is that you are framing things based on the logic of Western politics and this is Lebanon. So.

Here is an easy to use chart. This the way the average brain in Lebanon processes new information.

1- The Zaame (leader) is always right
2- Conspiracy theories make all inconsistencies consistent
3- Facts and logic

If you note, level 3 is never reached because there is always a Zaame statement or conspiracy theory out there that will nullify it.

I hope this helped :-)

Ramzi, you forgot an important rule!

2.5 – It must be somebody else fault.

http://levitr.forum5.com/