Bye bye General, hello Mr. President: Lebanon’s fait accompli head of state

Lebanon has a new president — finally. After more than two years of a vacancy in the presidential palace, the Lebanese Parliament managed to elect a head of state. For many in the international community, this marks a triumph of consensus, a return to constitutional norms, and perhaps even a glimmer of hope for a country battered by crises.

Yet, while a functioning presidency is, in theory, vital for a government’s proper operation, let’s not mistake this procedural box-ticking exercise for genuine progress.

The way this presidency came to be is hardly cause for optimism. If anything, it underscores the decrepit state of Lebanon’s political system — a system eroded by decades of sectarian squabbling, delegitimised by Hezbollah’s military duality, and ravaged by bankers-cum-politicians who orchestrated one of the worst financial collapses in modern history.

It took over two years of haggling over which Maronite Christian should become president only to end up with the default option: the army commander. This is the third time since the civil war that Lebanon has reverted to this fallback choice, and each time it smacks of a political elite incapable of innovation or accountability.

This is dysfunction at its finest — the kind of systemic rot that shouldn’t inspire a standing ovation and a red carpet. 

This brings us to the larger question: what exactly makes the commander of the army a suitable president? Running a military institution requires procedural rigour and discipline, but it doesn’t necessarily translate into the vision or empathy needed to address Lebanon’s socioeconomic and geopolitical quagmire.

Being a general doesn’t mean you can educate children, care for the elderly, return stolen deposits, or formulate policies to revive a crumbling economy. General Joseph Aoun, now President Aoun, has offered little to suggest he has plans for any of these pressing issues.

Moreover, the perception that a military leader brings strength and decisiveness is deeply flawed. Lebanon’s army — though respected — is far from a model of reform or efficiency.

Under General Aoun’s leadership, the institution has stagnated in critical areas. The officer corps remains bloated, and structural reforms have been conspicuously absent. The financial crisis that crippled the nation also threatened to collapse the army, yet no significant changes were implemented to ensure its financial sustainability or streamline its operations.

If this lack of action is indicative of how President Aoun intends to govern, Lebanon is in for more of the same: tinkering at the margins while avoiding the root causes of its crises. 

Can Lebanon stop the rot?

And let’s not forget the military tribunal system — a holdover from a bygone era — which has been used to prosecute civilians, including journalists and comedians, for something as innocuous as Facebook posts.

This practice is unconstitutional, draconian, and antithetical to the liberal, transparent governance Lebanon so desperately needs. A country that punishes its citizens for free expression under the guise of military discipline is not a country on the road to recovery.

Even with a president in place, Lebanon’s track record offers little hope that this will lead to meaningful change. Over the past two years of presidential vacancy, the so-called caretaker government operated very much as if little were amiss, underscoring how irrelevant the presidency has become to the day-to-day realities of governance in Lebanon.

When there was a president, cabinets were just as ineffective at implementing reforms as they were without one. We all know the system, in its entirety, is paralysed by its sectarian structure, petty squabbles, and international interference. So, let’s not pretend the presence of a president is going to change that.

So, what will change under President Aoun? If anything, his tenure will test how well he can navigate the same old horse-trading politics that have crippled every other presidency. Will he form a cabinet stacked with loyalists to the traditional parties, or will he attempt — against all odds — to push for a truly qualified government? Based on historical precedent and his track record, the former seems more plausible.

Subscribe Now and Listen to our Podcasts On

All that said, Lebanon needs a chance, and by extension, so does President Aoun. He enters office not as a saviour, but as a fait accompli — the inevitable outcome of a dysfunctional political process. While this hardly inspires confidence, it also means expectations are tempered. Perhaps this could work in his favour, allowing him to surprise a weary nation with even modest successes.

There is historical precedent for a general-turned-president to leave a lasting legacy. President Fouad Chehab, for instance, laid the foundations for institutions that still form what is left of the Lebanese state: the National Social Security Fund, which many vulnerable Lebanese still rely on; the Central Inspection Board, which (in theory) regulates the performance of public administrations; the Civil Service Board, which is supposed to oversee recruitment and management of civil servants based on merit; as well as the Lebanese University.

But Chehab’s era also introduced a security state that terrorised dissenters, monitoring political opposition, suppressing dissent, and conducting widespread surveillance, leading to civil liberties and political freedoms being quashed. Lebanon cannot afford a repeat of that dark chapter. 

As Lebanon transitions from General Aoun to President Aoun, the road ahead is fraught with challenges, not least of which are Hezbollah’s military duality, Israel’s continued occupation of southern Lebanon, the unfolding transition in Syria, and returning Lebanese savings stuck in the country’s broken banking sector.

So this is not a time for blind optimism or complacency. It is a time to demand bold, inclusive, and transparent governance from President Aoun — qualities that have been glaringly absent from our head of state for far too long.

Aoun’s tenure will ultimately be judged by his ability to rise above the circumstances of his appointment. He may not have come to power as a unifying figure, but he has a chance to lead as one. If he fails, President Aoun will be remembered as 'just another general'.

Sami Halabi is Director of Policy at Badil | The Alternative Policy Institute, a Beirut-based think-tank.

Follow him on X: @sami_halabi

Have questions or comments? Email us at: [email protected]

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.