Don't Dismiss Obama's role in Lebanese Elections Posted by Max Bergmann

This has been tossed around on the internets today and I think it is very much an open question. There was a wide expectation that Hezbollah was going to win the parliamentary elections, instead the more pro-western March 14th movement was victorious. The AP framed the elections as "the first major political test in the Middle East since President Barack Obama called last week for a "new beginning between the United States and Muslims." So presumably Obama passed the test - but is this right? Could Obama's speech have had such an impact that it contributed to a March 14th victory?  In short, while there are plenty of reasons to be very cautious injumping to that conclusion given Lebanon's politics, Obama's impact definitely shouldn't be dismissed by observers either.

Many Lebanese experts have dismissed the impact of the speech pointing to a variety of domestic reasons. Lebanon political expert Dr. Omri Nir told the Jersualem Post that

 "I didn't see an impact of the speech [from Cairo] on the elections campaign," he added. Nir attributed the unexpected outcome to internal politics among Lebanon's Maronite Christians. Lebanese citizens usually cast their vote based on the people running and not according to party lines, he explained.

Christopher Dickey at Time also makes the useful point that "The fact is, Lebanese politics are uniquely treacherous... when elections take place, that old adage, 'all politics is local,' comes into play at every level and in very particular ways."

But although many Lebanese political experts dismiss the impact of Obama, sometimes issue-area experts are so immersed in their area that they really can't see the forest from the trees. The fact is that atmospheric changes in political environments matter and are often really hard to detect at the time.

One thing I found bizarre about the literature on democratic transitions was how most of the theories were on the causes were focused almost exclusively on specific internal developments and largely neglected outside factors, such as the international movements or events. For instance, concerning Spain's transition most theories focus on internal dymaics and often totally ignore the demonstration effect of having a successful democratic club in the European Community next door. While each of the southern European transitions happened as a result of their own internal political dynamics, it wasn't a coincidence that Spain, Greece, and Pourtugal all transitioned at the same time. Additionally, it is not a coincidence that there are often particular years at which revolutionary change happens suddenly - such as 1989 and 1848. Each successive revolution in those years evolved due to its own particular circumstances - but the demonstration effect contributed to the snowball of change that occured.

Now what happened in Lebanon was no revolution. We are talking about a small shift in the electorate. But just as the atmosphere of 1989 or 1848 created an impetus for change, the same principles apply to 2009 - albeit on a much much smaller scale. President Obama's efforts beginning with his inaugural address, continued with his overtures to Iran, his engagement in the peace process, leveling with Israel on settlements, his speech in Cairo, and the nature of his story and background - may not be revolutionary - but they have no doubt changed the climate of American engagement with the region.

It would follow thent that if Bush's approach and his policies had a negative impact in this regard, then dramatically changing the tone and approach would surely have to have some impact. For instance, under Bush, it was clear that American support for a particular candidate or party was likely a death blow in the Middle East. So the fact that the side that the Obama administration was clearly pulling for did better than expected - or at least wasn't hurt by that stance - would seem to suggest that there was some impact, since Obama's speech was last week, Biden did go to Beirut, and Ray Lahood was there today. Therefore, former Cheney advisor David Wurmser deserves to have a significant amount of egg on his face after tell the WsJ before the election that "The Lebanon vote could mark a major strategic shift for the region...Iran could increasingly be viewed as pre-eminent, while U.S. influence wanes."

Instead, the vote, at the very least demonstrates that Obama's approach is a vast improvement over the Bush administration. The Telegraph quotes, Rami Khouri, of the American University of Beirut,

"This was the first real victory by pro-American groups in the ideological battle that has defined this region in the last 10 years. Every time the US tried to help somebody in the region, it hurt them and they lost." A 25-year old software designer from West Beirut, said: "It was 'you are either with us or against us' before and both sides had this attitude. Now it is something in the middle with Obama and I think there is more freedom there."

However, despite all of this, it is really hard to tangibly assess the precise impact of Obama's engagement with the region on the election. And the fact that many point to the Iranian elections as the big test maybe very unfair to the Obama administration, since local issues may very well dominate and even though we may think otherwise the world does not alway revolve around the United States. Nevertheless, while a great deal of politics is local, not all of it is. The international atmosphere matters and the approach by the Obama administration it seems has definitely helped change it - the question that we are all wondering is by how much.

Comments

[Dimitri]

I have to agree with the analysts that say that Obama's recent speech didnt play a huge impact. The thing you have to remember is that this election was decided by the Christian electorate. As a Lebanese Christian, I can tell you that his words had little effect. Obama is not as revered as you say they are amongst Christians. In fact, Bush was quite favorable amongst the Christians. He did do much for the Lebanese people, yet all you hear is Hezbollah taking about how evil he was. Now on to what really drove the Christians to vote the way they did was the Maronite Patriarch. Never does a person in the position give an official endorsement of a party or group. Usually he will hint whats they best course of action, but never outright tell his followers. This time around, however, the Patriarch gave a clear message that voting for Aoun and Hezbollah would be detremental to the country. It was his words that drove Christians to vote they way they do. Obama's words did very little, if anything at all to determine the election.

[Peace]

Although many in the United States view the current events as a positive development for Obama's Middle Eastern intiatives however it is more than likely these developments in Lebanon are likely to provide the Obama administration headaches. There is a unequal allotment of seats in which the Christians get half of the seats in parliament when in reality they consists less than half of the population. As long as the majority Muslim population, especially the Shiites, feel that they are not being properly represented in parliament there is a high probability for political conflict. In future a political conflict the Israelis could be involved and that could ruin Obama's efforts at acheiving Middle East peace. If the United States really wants peace in Lebanon it would have to advocate allocate seats based equally on population.

[Don Bacon]

Now what happened in Lebanon was no revolution. We are talking about a small shift in the electorate.

You got that right. One seat.

In Lebanon, the Western-backed coalition of Sunni, Christian and Druze parties landed 71 seats in the 128-member parliament, one more than four years ago, against 57 for Hizbullah and its Shiite and Christian allies. Hizbullah, who is backed by Iran and Syria, fielded only 11 candidates in the race, all of whom won seats.

So not much change.

[Will Smith]

I am behind you.

[chi hair tools]

Expensive department stores hype chi flat irons their ineffective skin care products. Many have ingredients that can do more harm than good. I'm not going to cover the ingredients chi hair straightener in this article as I have in others. What I want to emphasize here is the importance of using a neck firming cream versus a skin moisturizer. Later I"ll tell you where to get a good line of natural skin care products.

[watermelon]

hello,your blog is interesting.
welcome to my page!
---
Gucci Shoes

[air jordan shoes]

A shoe industry myths was be open. Nowaday, over 20 years have passed ,the best basketball shoes sale on line is jordan shoes series shoes.In the past 20 years , two back and three retired have been experience by michael jordan shoes ,while numerous trials and hardships have gone through by AIR JORDAN shoes .

[david]

Usually he will hint whats they best course of action, but never outright tell his followers. This time around, however, the Patriarch gave a clear message that voting for Aoun and Hezbollah would be detremental to the country. It was his words that drove Christians to vote they way they do.

Hizbullah, who is backed by Iran and Syria, fielded only 11 candidates in the race, all of whom won seats.

David from - Deeper voice and Grow Taller

[grow taller 4 idiots]

It was his words that drove Christians to vote they way they do.

[Malware Removal Bot]

As long as the majority Muslim population, especially the Shiites, feel that they are not being properly represented in parliament there is a high probability for political conflict.