Power-Sharing after Civil War
This book provides a wide-ranging exploration of the legacy of Lebanons peace agreement in the 30 years since it was signed.
The chapters in this edited volume have been written by leading scholars and provide in-depth analyses of key issues in postwar Lebanon, including the performance of power-sharing, human rights, communal memory and sectarianism, conflict and peace, militias, political parties and elections. A core strength of the book is the multidisciplinary approach to understanding postwar Lebanon, ranging from political science, international relations, sociology, conflict and peace studies, history and memory studies. The multidisciplinary character of the book allows for a rich and detailed evaluation of the ongoing legacy and consequences of Lebanons postwar settlement.
The book will be of interest to scholars, students and people interested in contemporary Lebanese politics and society. It will also be attractive for a wider international audience interested in the consequences of postwar power-sharing systems and peace processes.
The chapters in this book were originally published as a special issue of the journal, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics.
John Nagle is Professor of Sociology at Queens University Belfast. Professor Nagle has authored and co-authored 6 books, more than 40 articles in leading international journals and several chapter in edited books. His research primarily focusses on violently divided societies, which he explores comparatively.
Mary-Alice Clancy is a researcher in Northern Ireland. Educated in Boston and Belfast, Mary-Alice has written two books on Northern Ireland, and her research has been featured in the Guardian, Observer, Irish Independent, Al-Jazeera and BBC Radio 4. Mary-Alice has held academic positions at several UK universities, and has served as consultant for the Asia-Europe Foundation and the Linenhall Library in Belfast.
First published 2022
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
2022 Taylor & Francis
Chapter 2 2019 Matthijs Bogaards. Originally published as Open Access.
With the exception of Chapter 2, no part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. For details on the rights for Chapter 2, please see the chapters Open Access footnote.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN13: 978-1-032-13545-8 (hbk)
ISBN13: 978-1-032-13547-2 (pbk)
ISBN13: 978-1-003-22976-6 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003229766
Typeset in Minion Pro
by codeMantra
Publishers Note
The publisher accepts responsibility for any inconsistencies that may have arisen during the conversion of this book from journal articles to book chapters, namely the inclusion of journal terminology.
Disclaimer
Every effort has been made to contact copyright holders for their permission to reprint material in this book. The publishers would be grateful to hear from any copyright holder who is not here acknowledged and will undertake to rectify any errors or omissions in future editions of this book.
Power-sharing after the Arab Spring? Insights from Lebanons Political Transition
Tamirace Fakhoury
ABSTRACT
The article looks at the legacy of consociationalism in Lebanon with the aim of illuminating some insights on the linkages between power-sharing and conflict resolution in the post-2011 Middle East. It highlights three core dilemmas or governance traps that have recurred in Lebanons political dynamic: the power-sharing formulas proneness to deadlock, its dependence on the external environment as an avenue for partisanship and sectarian leverage, and its weak responsiveness to demands from below. The article shows how these dilemmas are tightly linked to the politics of sectarianism. While Lebanons postwar transition (1990 onward) serves as a backdrop for exploring these dilemmas, emphasis is placed on the performance of Lebanons political system in the postArab Spring era. The aim is to assess whether Lebanons consociational performance has matured over time. The Lebanese experience brings into sharper focus the limitations of sectarian power-sharing. Still, it provides useful insights for reshaping the debate on power-sharing in divided societies of the Arab world.
Introduction
The
In the wake of the relapsed Arab Spring,
A scholarly trend within the continuum of debates on political transitions in the Middle East has been the discussion about whether forms of governance based on power-sharing constitute realistic options to mitigate intrastate tensions and exit wars.
The argument for introducing power-sharing in many post-2011 deeply divided Arab polities is strongly policy oriented and rooted in the Arab worlds context-specific realities.
Within this climate, regional and international actors have emphasized the importance of governance nested in power-sharing arrangements in the post-2011 Middle East.
Although the twinned concept of inclusive governance and conflict alleviation in Arab plural societies has evolved into a key concern, rather than how the political designs in which communities share power may emerge and consolidate.
Since the onset of the 2011 communities has developed, since its formation in 1943, a consociational model that has survived manifold wars and crises. Yet, which lessons can we learn from Lebanons legacy of sectarian power-sharing, and can Lebanonas a test case for consociational governancehelp us understand the perils and benefits of power-sharing for the region?
This article looks at the legacy of consociationalism in Lebanon, a small polity that has inspired Lijpharts theory of consociationalism,sectarianism.
Lebanons pathway to power-sharing: resilience, dilemmas, and breakdown(s)
As noted in the introduction to this special issue, Lebanons trajectory of power-sharing is a mixture of both a historical and institutional legacy.Taif Agreement initiated Lebanons transition from the war, hinting at the potential resurgence of power-sharing after conflicts.
With the onset of the Sunni community to challenge Hezbollahs power base in Lebanon and to fight against it in Syria. The Al Asir uprising was, however, successfully quelled by the Lebanese army, and Hezbollahs military entanglement in Syria has not led to any full-scale armed conflict in Lebanon. Nevertheless, gridlock between the aforementioned contending alliances, the 8 March and 14 March alliances, have paralyzed state institutions. Parliamentary elections were postponed twice (in 2013 and 2014), and governments have had either a difficult birth or have broken down. Additionally, divisiveness about issues ranging from Hezbollahs weaponry to the distribution of ministerial portfolios and the management of public services (e.g., garbage collection and electricity and technology services) have led to protracted deadlock.
To showcase Lebanons endemic power-sharing dilemmas, I draw first on the cases of political deadlocks since 2011 and their implications for policy making. Second, I explore how the postArab Spring landscape in general and Syrias war in particular have turned into a terrain for policy discord and sectarian leverage on Lebanese ground. Third, in the context of a politics of bickering, I illuminate the lack of elite responsiveness to demands from below. These dilemmas are mutually reinforcing. At their heart lurk the manifold ways through which strategic sectarianism reproduces itself through the power-sharing formula.