Seniora’s Bad Idea

Our Prime Minister wants the Saudis to appoint the neutral Minister. Is that a good thing?

King-Making King?

On the face of it, P.M. Seniora’s suggestion to Assafir (English @ Naharnet) today that Saudi Arabia should appoint the kingpin minister makes practical sense. As a Lebanese Minister put it yesterday on a TV show: Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that has a good working relationship with all the parties involved in the Lebanese crisis.

Moreover, the move is a shrewd political move from Seniora, who was watching with bemusement the opposition’s media and politicians waxing poetics on Saudi Arabia.

By suggesting a bigger role for the Saudis, Mr. Seniora is effectively challenging the opposition to put their money where their mouth is. Something he knows they’ll refuse given their Syrian connection, and given how much the Christian wing of the opposition distrusts the Kingdom.

But Seniora’s idea is flawed for two reasons.

The first reason is one of principle: The very nature of March 14, an alliance that promotes itself as a “Lebanon first” entity, forbids it from accepting such an obvious foreign patronage in the name of congruence. What is the difference between Syria’s appointment of President Emile Lahhoud (a person March 14 abhors) and Saudi Arabia’s would-be appointment of a kingpin Minister?

The second reason, which is related to the first, is political: Saudi Arabia, although Lebanon’s largest donor and employer and traditional peace sponsor, is not popular with the generally Liberal Lebanese layman. Seniora’s idea is already triggering murmurs of discontent within his Christian and Druse allies, not to mention the liberally-inclined Sunnis (this blogger included).

Many are secretly thinking: Is Giving Saudi Arabia the power to dissolve the Lebanese government if the winds of friendship change the answer to our stalemate?