16 May 2008

Editorial

Senior representatives of feuding Lebanese political parties are scheduled to begin talks on resolving their power struggle in Doha today, and the venue could not be more appropriate: Hundreds of thousands of Lebanese have effectively been made economic refugees by the political crisis in their homeland, and Qatar has been a prime destination for these talented but exasperated people. This should remind principals and mediators alike of the urgency surrounding their mission - and that what really matters is improving the lot of the average Lebanese, not satisfying the whims of the bigshots.

The Qatari government has already earned our thanks for its willingness to undertake what promises to be a difficult task. It should be forewarned, though, that the interlocutors it has agreed to shepherd are not altogether what they seem. They may act and look civil, and know how to observe niceties, but each brings a common set of flaws (among varying collections of others) to the table: None of them are lily-white, none have not made unrealistic promises to their supporters, and none have produced anything like viable visions of statecraft. The opposition is enamored of slogans built around a "just and strong state," but it has not informed anyone about how it would erect such an edifice. The ruling coalition has cobbled together what it calls a policy platform, but the document contains nothing but polemical declarations (and not very imaginative ones at that).

If such individuals are to agree on anything, the Qataris will have to avoid the trap that befell previous brokers, who allowed themselves to believe that it was enough to get the Lebanese in the same room. It was not, and that fact has not changed: The participants' positions are too vague, their mutual distrust too deep, and their agendas too intertwined with those of foreign powers for them to come up with solutions outside a highly structured process. On everything from a new electoral law for the 2009 polls to implementing the Taif Accord that ended the 1975-1990 (yes, that was 18 years ago) Civil War, discussions need to be kept within clearly defined limits, and proposals need to be put in writing. If these conditions are not met, the process will inevitably revert to the mudslinging in which the parties' respective media outlets have been engaged for longer than anyone cares to remember.

Qatar's emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, has a reputation for being his own man: His country hosts the nerve center for US combat forces in the entire Middle East, but he is not afraid to tell Washington when and where to get off; he maintains low-level relations with Israel, but has been just as willing to engage with Hamas when other Arab powers have shunned it. To some extent, this maverick streak is a product of the financial muscle provided by Qatar's extravagant energy wealth, but it would be impossible if the emir were not blessed with a fiercely independent personality and some very clear ideas about where he wants to lead his own people and the region. If he is to accomplish his main challenge - i.e. to save his Lebanese guests from themselves - he will have to remember, at all times and in all situations, that they are nothing like him.