After meeting with several ministers in Lebanon’s new government, the ambassador of a foreign nation expressed shock at the level of unpreparedness among some officials, noting that many had no real grasp of their ministries or their responsibilities. Meanwhile, a party-affiliated MP has been busy assembling a team for his party’s ministers, one of whom appears to have no understanding whatsoever of his assigned ministry.

Beyond individual ministers, a startling moment occurred during the government’s first sessions when a decision was made to retain a minister in her previous administrative role while keeping her official position vacant until the end of her ministerial term—an outright violation of the law. Some argue that, judging by its decisions and handling of key files, this government seems more eager to expedite the end of the presidential term rather than fulfill its mandate.

The government's formation and the appointment of its prime minister, Nawaf Salam, do not reflect its current reality, nor do they align with the international momentum that ushered it in. A reassessment of its mission to implement UN Resolution 1701 was evident in the remarks of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister Tarek Mitri, who stated that there is no set timeline for its execution and that any progress must be negotiated among Lebanese stakeholders and preceded by military reinforcement. Such a stance directly undermines the international momentum generated by U.S.-French arrangements that had initially supported the government.

Additionally, the government has adopted the budget drafted by former Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s cabinet—a budget that lacks accurate figures reflecting Lebanon’s financial crisis and contains no substantive reform measures. This contradicts the core demands of the World Bank and the international community. How can a year-old budget be passed despite the devastation, wars, and economic collapse that Lebanon has endured? The government appears incapable of presenting meaningful reforms, particularly as it faces mounting pressure from the international community to hold municipal elections on schedule—an issue on which no excuses for delays are being tolerated. The impression is growing that Lebanon has settled into a perpetual caretaker government mode, as though it is expected by international powers to remain in a constant state of interim governance.

The government’s approach to administration, appointments, and the entrenched quota system continues to shatter hopes for reform. A striking example was a lawsuit filed by the Association of Banks against the advocacy group "Kulluna Irada," (We are all willpower), which opposed the banks’ legal action. Meanwhile, the government has yet to address the banking crisis, despite previous promises that it would be one of its top priorities.

On the issue of appointments, the government has already suffered a defeat, merely replicating the cronyism of previous administrations. It has cemented the very patronage system that was heavily criticized during former President Michel Aoun’s tenure, as he failed to challenge or dismantle it due to entrenched political red lines—some of which were dictated by the "Shiite Duo" alliance, where Hezbollah ultimately prioritized its partnership with Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri over fully supporting Aoun’s presidency.

The recent appointments were a setback for both the administration and its government, as they emerged from a deeply rooted system of political horse-trading. The process dragged on for weeks due to behind-the-scenes disagreements among the three main political leaders. Speaker Berri proposed candidates for the General Security Directorate, but President Joseph Aoun rejected them, requesting alternative suggestions, which Berri refused to provide. He remained adamant about appointing his preferred candidate. Hezbollah handed the file over to Berri and merely observed from the sidelines, citing its focus on strategic matters. After prolonged back-and-forth negotiations and implicit threats of boycotts, the deadlock was resolved by appointing Brigadier General Hassan Choucair as Director-General of General Security, while securing a compromise to retain Murshid Suleiman, whom Berri had insisted on keeping.

This episode underscores the government's inability to translate words into action. President Aoun saw himself as the supreme commander of the armed forces and believed he had authority over security appointments. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam insisted that Sunni appointments fell under his jurisdiction. Speaker Berri, for his part, maintained that he had the final say over appointments that impacted his community, arguing that "the people of Mecca know their own affairs best."

Beyond this wrangling, the government appears completely detached from the past, except for its inherited political and sectarian structures. It is pushing for a new mechanism for administrative appointments, despite an existing framework drafted in 2010 by former Minister of Administrative Reform Mohammad Fneish. Implementing a new system would require time that the government simply does not have, given that it is expected to last only a year before municipal elections.

Amid Lebanon’s worst crisis and in the aftermath of a devastating war, the prime minister declared his commitment to the constitution by holding cabinet sessions at a third location outside the Presidential Palace and the Government Palace. Yet, the same constitution grants ministers the authority to oversee appointments in their own ministries—a right that has now been completely overridden by political bargaining and sectarian allocations, as seen in recent security and military appointments.

What is even more striking are the positions adopted by certain ministers. The Minister of Social Affairs opposes the return of Syrian refugees to Syria, while Tarek Mitri calls for dialogue over the implementation of Resolution 1701. The foreign minister, on the other hand, has blamed Hezbollah for Israel’s repeated aggressions against Lebanon. Yet, despite Israel’s violations since the resolution was passed, Lebanon has failed to file a single complaint with the UN Security Council.

Some argue that this government is an instrument of the international community, expected to go beyond mere administrative appointments to fulfill broader geopolitical objectives—namely, the disarmament of Hezbollah and the weakening of the "Shiite Duo’s" influence within state institutions. Following the war that devastated Hezbollah’s base of support, the government’s true mission is becoming clearer. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly called for border negotiations, signaling a step toward normalization.

This government’s policy statement was filled with ambitious pledges, yet its administrative and judicial appointments will take months to finalize. According to sources familiar with its inner workings, its primary goal is simply to oversee municipal elections—nothing more.