What Dampened the Optimism in Lebanon Following the Election of Joseph Aoun as President and the Immediate Appointment of Dr. Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister?

Before addressing this question, it is essential to place it within a broader framework: what is the current international and regional equation governing Lebanon?

Since the Taif Agreement, signed on September 23, 1989, which introduced significant amendments to the 1926 Constitution, Lebanon has been governed by the Syrian-Saudi equation ("S-S"), under direct U.S. oversight—if not outright tutelage.

This arrangement lasted until February 14, 2005, the day of the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. A man of considerable influence with extensive international and Arab connections, Hariri had managed to maintain a fragile balance within Lebanon's political system. His decisive role in brokering the ceasefire agreement that ended Israel’s 1996 “Operation Grapes of Wrath” is not easily forgotten. That offensive, aimed at weakening Hezbollah, lasted 16 days and resulted in heavy casualties, including the Qana massacre, where over 100 civilians sheltering in a UN compound were killed by Israeli bombardment.

The withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon, officially completed on April 26, 2005, was an anticipated development. It fit into the broader global transformations following the 9/11 attacks, marked by wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, Hariri’s assassination accelerated Syria’s departure, leaving a power vacuum that the U.S. quickly moved to fill by taking a direct role in managing the post-crisis landscape.

Amid this shift, Lebanon’s political forces attempted to adapt. The March 14 Alliance—comprising the Future Movement, the Progressive Socialist Party, and the Lebanese Forces—considered itself the victor and extended an olive branch to its rivals in the March 8 Alliance, which included the Free Patriotic Movement, the Amal Movement, and Hezbollah, the latter being Syria’s closest ally in Lebanon. This led to the formation of the so-called "Quadripartite Alliance" in the 2005 elections, which notably excluded Michel Aoun—later president from 2016 to 2022—despite his crucial role in the Syrian withdrawal. Walid Jumblatt had even dubbed Aoun a "tsunami" for his political impact.

Yet, this fragile unity did not last. Just months later, cracks appeared when Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s government endorsed the establishment of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to investigate Hariri’s assassination. Hezbollah and its allies rejected the move and boycotted the session, marking the beginning of a deep political rift.

As Syria’s influence waned, Iran’s role in Lebanon grew, solidifying its presence either through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or Hezbollah. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia gradually withdrew from the Lebanese arena, fundamentally altering the balance of power. The 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel further reshaped this dynamic, giving rise to a new equation: the "A-I" (America-Iran) axis replaced the former "S-S" arrangement. Lebanon’s political climate became subject to alternating waves of tension and détente, depending on the fluctuating relations between Washington and Tehran. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal brokered under Barack Obama was later scrapped by Donald Trump, while Joe Biden promised to revive it—an unfulfilled commitment to date. With the possibility of Trump returning to the White House, a new dynamic could emerge, potentially seeking to de-escalate tensions with Iran as part of a broader “zero-crisis” strategy.

In Lebanon, perspectives remain divided. Some call for resisting what they see as U.S. tutelage, while others advocate for eliminating Iran’s influence. However, the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation and its Lebanese counterpart, the “Support for Gaza” war, have significantly weakened Iran’s regional standing. Palestinian resistance in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, pro-Iranian militias in Iraq, the Assad regime in Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen have all suffered setbacks, reshaping the Middle Eastern power landscape. The question remains: if Trump returns to office, how will he approach this evolving geopolitical reality?

Against this backdrop, and with yesterday’s announcement of a ceasefire in Gaza, some argue that the political course set in motion on January 9 will inevitably follow an American trajectory, despite the appearance of looming crises in Lebanon’s new presidential term.

Others, however, celebrate what they perceive as a defeat for Nabih Berri (Speaker of the Parliament of Lebanon) and Hezbollah in recent developments. Yet, yesterday’s meeting between Berri and Nawaf Salam—necessitated by the Shiite boycott of parliamentary consultations—suggests that tensions may be mitigated. According to Salam, no obstacles threaten the formation of the new government, and his discussions with Berri reaffirmed the foundational importance of the Taif Agreement as Lebanon’s institutional bedrock.

Saudi involvement and U.S. supervision remain pivotal, in coordination with several European and Arab partners. The central question, however, remains: will Washington and Tehran find common ground, or are we witnessing the gradual dismantling of Iran’s influence in the Middle East?

In Lebanon, the stakes go beyond global power struggles. The success of the new presidency depends on inclusivity—any attempt to sideline or marginalize a political actor risks further destabilizing an already fractured nation.

Meanwhile, another battle rages: the struggle for power and prestige, with some deluding themselves into believing they orchestrate every event—from the Gaza war to Joseph Aoun’s election and Nawaf Salam’s appointment.

This illusion is reminiscent of an old fable: A poor villager leaves his home in search of fortune, abandoning his family and barren lands. Years later, he receives a letter claiming that his children have become influential decision-makers. Eager to witness this transformation, he returns to his village in the dead of winter, expecting to find prosperity. But nothing has changed—the poverty remains. Perplexed, he asks an elder about his children’s supposed influence. The old man points to the family’s daily ritual: lacking firewood, the children toss dry twigs into the brazier. The flames flare up momentarily, forcing them to step back before approaching again when the fire dims…

The father, stunned by the absurdity of the claim, leaves the village disillusioned.

Today, Lebanon’s political equation is summed up in a single letter: the "A" of America. As Washington sets the course, others oscillate between resignation and fleeting illusions—just like those children warming themselves before a fading fire.