The Other Tripoli Bomb

Could the Tripoli Block’s bombshell be Hariri’s back door to compromise?

Yada yada yada?

“We will boycott the election of a new President if less than the two thirds of Lebanese MPs are present”

You’d be excused to think the above statement was made by an opposition figure. But when you learn that it was Mohamed Al Safadi, the effective leader of the March14 Tripoli Block (Three Sunnis and One Greek Orthodox), it can be a cause for scratching heads.

March14’s strategy is to conduct a Presidential election “on time” irrespective of the size of the majority. The purpose is to get a March 14 President elected against the will of the opposition. Alsafadi’s coalition of four is small, but it can break the back of the tiny majority that could have made the Presidential election constitutional in the eyes of March 14.

Alsafadi’s statement, which was immediately lauded by Speaker Berri as “A Nationalistic and courageous step”, can be looked at as a back door channel through which Hariri is compromising on the Presidency. Hariri has always been tempted to compromise on that issue, which has a higher priority to the Christian wing of March 14 than to the Sunni wing. 

The choice of the Tripoli block also has a high “plausible deniability” factor. The city of Tripoli, although a staunch supporter of the Future movement, still has a strong grudge against Samir Geagea who is believed to have killed Rachid Karami, a popular old time Tripoli Prime Minister. Mr. Geagea is the strongest advocate of a “March 14 President”, as opposed to the “Compromise President” the Shias are publicly inviting the Sunnis to choose together.

Hariri can always maintain that Safadi’s move is for local political reasons and that it has nothing to do with his own commitments to his Christian partners, and Mr. Safadi insists that his block is still a major part of the March 14 coalition. 

Update: Patriarch Sfeir Endorses the constitutional view that two-thirds of the MPs should attend during the Presidential election. He says the constitution is clear regarding that matter.