Lebanese Election Results Will Not Bring Instability If Syria Plays Its Cards Right.

*** Some Observers See Hariri's Victory As Being The Result Of Him Spending An Estimated $50 Million On Electioneering

*** Others See A New Style Of Syrian Influence Over Lebanon, With Bashar Al Assad Opting For A Less Interventionist Approach Than Was The Case With His Late Father

Clinton Makes A Last Ditch Attempt To Save The Peace Process At The UN's Millennium Summit 

BEIRUT - The results of the Lebanese parliamentary elections are causing concern among politicians who anticipate a period of instability. They believe the overwhelming victory of Rafiq Al Hariri and his supporters would mean a drastic overhaul of the existing arrangement whereby the president, prime minister and speaker had a relatively good working relationship. Such a change could become dangerous if there arises a tendency by the new prime minister to assert his power and to upset the delicate balance in the relationship with the presidency, which has become more powerful under Emile Lahoud.

There is another school of thought which believes that a return to "Hariri's style" of leadership will not bring instability. Those who belong to this school of though point out that the government of Salim Hoss has not shown the dynamism necessary to bring Lebanon out of its economic difficulties. They believe Hariri has the necessary skills required to turn the economy around. They note that much of the dramatic changes that have occurred in the capital, which has got a facelift in recent years, are the result of efforts made by Hariri during his previous term as prime minister, between 1992 and 1998.

Most APS sources, however, believe the second school to be more accurate in its assessment. While they do not expect a rapid turnaround in the economy, they expect that a change in government will inject a sense of dynamism into the country - even if Hariri is not the prime minister, which still remains a possibility. They expect that in the coming weeks the various political forces in the country would reach a workable cohabitation arrangement.

The process of choosing a new prime minister and the formation of a new government can begin only after new deputies take their oath in mid-October. A hint about what can be expected was given by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Shiite, when he said recently that the next "government should be broadly representative, ensure some kind of unanimity and be set up in co-ordination with President Emile Lahoud".

In this context, it is important to note that Berri's support is essential for any contender for the prime minister's post; the speaker is seen as an ally of Hariri. Stressing the urgency of the economic situation facing the country, he added that: "We have to commit ourselves to an economic resistance operation, otherwise there will be total collapse". Lebanon's public debt is expected to touch $25bn by the end of this year, a situation which has arisen ironically because of huge expenditures incurred during Hariri's previous term.

The sources say that much will depend on the way Syria in which plays its cards in the coming months. This is a new situation for both Lebanon and Syria, i.e. (a) it is the first time Lebanon after the civil war is having an election in which the outcome was not fully expected, (b) it is the first election being held in the post-Assad era with Syrian President Bashar Al Assad remaining somewhat vague about his domestic and international agenda.

The overwhelming victory of Hariri was a surprise for Damascus, which had worked since late 1999 to ensure that a strongly pro-Syrian slate would win at the polls. Indeed, Western publications have accused Syria of reorganising electoral districts in order to ensure a win for its candidates. The 'Middle East Intelligence Bulletin' of August 2000, for instance, says that in November and December 1999, the head of Syrian military intelligence in Lebanon, Gen. Ghazi Kanaan, and Bashar held a series of meetings with Premier Hoss, Speaker Berri and other pro-Syrian politicians to re-organise electoral districts.

According to the bulletin: "North Lebanon was split into two districts so as to ensure the election of Agriculture Minister Suleiman Franjieh and other Syrian allies. This involved combining the districts of Bsharri, Akkar, and Minyeh-Dinnieh even though the areas are not geographically contiguous. Mount Lebanon was divided into four districts. Once again, predominantly Druze areas were set apart in order to bolster Walid Jumblatt and his allies...The district of Metn was designed to consolidate support for Interior Minister Michel Murr".

The 'Middle East Intelligence Bulletin' adds that: "In order to reduce the number of seats won by former prime minister Rafiq Hariri...Beirut was sliced into three districts - one going to Hariri and the others corresponding with the power bases of his two main rivals for leadership of the Sunni community, MP Tammam Salam (District 2), Prime Minister Hoss (District 3)".

Yet, if true, the district reorganisation does not seem to have worked at least in Hariri's case. This leads, according to the first school of thought that expects instability, to another possible explanation, which is that Damascus has decided to shift its favours towards Hariri instead of Lahoud.

There has been speculation that Syria has lost faith in Lahoud and Interior Minister Murr because they could not ensure the desired results in the elections. But APS sources do not subscribe to this theory that Syria is about to shift back totally to Hariri, whom it had played a role in removing from the premiership in 1998.

From the perspective of Damascus, according to the sources, the main objective was simply to "get the elections out of the way" without upsetting the pro-Syrian political balance in the country. This was mainly because Bashar's leadership cannot afford any instability in Lebanon at this juncture, as he is still in the process of consolidating his power within Syria. Thus, having handled the "Lebanon desk" in recent years, he is very knowledgeable about the situation in the country and can be expected to push for a conciliatory arrangement between the main players - i.e. Lahoud and Hariri.

This means both figures will have to compromise. Lahoud who has been used to a more powerful presidency will probably have to take a lower profile. On the other hand Hariri, who concentrated powers in his hand during his previous term, would have to be satisfied with less powerful premiership than he was used to. Speaker Berri can be expected to play a conciliatory role, thus enhancing his own powers.

What remains to be seen, the sources say, is whether the Syrian leadership under Bashar has the skills necessary to ensure that compromise can be achieved among the Lebanese leadership. Then the compromise would have to be maintained in the coming years amid the conflicting political interests represented by the new parliamentary deputies.