Lebanon lurched into the unknown this week, with Baabda presidential palace standing empty for the first time in the country's troubled history, Lucy Fielder reports On the stroke of midnight, 23 November, pro- Syrian President Emile Lahoud walked solemnly from Baabda, in the hills above Beirut. A military band bade him farewell with the national anthem. Against expectations and despite frequent political isolation, he had served his extended term to the full. But no successor had been agreed. President Lahoud was a controversial figure whose term extension in 2004, by constitutional amendment under Syrian pressure, marked the start of an open Lebanese movement against its Big Brother, who dominated Lebanon following its 1975-1990 Civil War and was forced to pull its troops out after former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri's assassination in February 2005. Furthermore, although he made a statement saying the "threat of a state of emergency" existed and entrusting the country's security to the army, Lahoud made no risky attempt to form a parallel government as many had feared. On the ground, his statement made little difference. Under Lebanon's constitution, the cabinet, not the president, has the power to declare a state of emergency. And the army has long assumed control of security, deploying thousands of extra soldiers on the streets in the days before Friday's failed vote. Sunni Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora's cabinet has taken over the prerogatives of the traditionally Maronite Christian presidency, as prescribed by the constitution. However, the opposition has considered his government non- constitutional since five Shia ministers and one allied Christian minister resigned in a dispute over power-sharing a year ago. Lebanon now remains at square one -- with the addition of a dangerous power vacuum and a growing sense of alienation among the once powerful Maronite Christians. In the mainly Sunni Beirut quarter of Tarika Jadida, a stronghold of anti-Syrian leader Saad Al-Hariri, fireworks burst into the sky as Lahoud left Baabda. But despite the celebration, it appeared this week that neither side held many cards. "All our politicians have failed and we're playing without rules now," said Rafik Khoury, head of the pro-government Al-Anwar daily. For the fifth time on Friday, the presidential vote was delayed, this time until 30 November. MPs from the 14 March movement, which takes its name from an anti-Syrian protest on that date in 2005, turned up to vote. The opposition, led by Iranian-backed Hizbullah, stayed outside the chamber to prevent the necessary two-thirds quorum, arguing, as it has for the past two months of haggling over the presidency, that Lebanon is based on consensus and a president should be agreed beforehand. Some had feared that 14 March would carry out an erstwhile threat to force a vote for a president by a simple majority instead of the constitutional two-thirds, taking advantage of their slight numerical edge in parliament. The opposition would consider such a step a serious escalation. In the end, both sides turned away from escalation and rhetoric was silenced. Outspoken Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, one of Syria's fiercest critics, was particularly placatory, making a call for consensus and ruling out the simple majority vote. Not only was Jumblatt formerly a hardline proponent of such an election, which would have been taken for an escalation by the opposition, but also he is seen as a weather-vane, reading the domestic and international mood and adjusting course accordingly. "These are reflections of changes in US policy," said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb of the Carnegie Endowment's Middle East Centre in Beirut. "It's a significant departure from his previous statements and we know that he's the US's mouthpiece." She described the about-turn as "trademark Jumblatt". "Jumblatt's either going along with Americans and toning it down, or he's afraid of a Syrian- American deal," she said. Much of the Lebanese press suggesting that a US-Syrian thaw may be in the offing, with Washington keen to bring Syria into its axis of "moderate" Arab governments and Damascus keen to end its international isolation and leaping at the chance to attend the Annapolis Arab-Israeli conference this week. Washington appears therefore to have eased for now its demands for a president from 14 March, which it backs along with Saudi Arabia, France, and most of the international community. Syria, meanwhile, decided not to push its Lebanese cards by attempting to keep Lahoud on beyond his term or encouraging him to form a second government. "Obviously the Syrians had a hand in Lahoud's decision," Saad-Ghorayeb said. "It was something of a U-turn because in the past he had threatened repeatedly to establish a second government or a military government." Intense negotiation and diplomatic activity have characterised the past few weeks, yet the first week of presidential vacuum was noticeably quiet. At the time of writing, few expected a vote to take place on 30 November as planned. It was unclear whether the crisis would continue for weeks or months, and how long Lebanon's Maronites would withstand what most see as an unacceptable decline in their traditional power. "There's no talk between the parties inside Lebanon now and outside parties are absorbed in Annapolis," Khoury said. "I don't think anything will happen now or even immediately after Annapolis." It is unlikely that the cabinet, dominated by Hariri's Sunni Future Movement, can undertake more than caretaker duties while it holds executive power without provoking the Christian street, which is split between supporters of opposition Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, part of 14 March. "I think the Christian street may be useful to the opposition because there's no fear of Sunni- Shia strife, and they have legitimate grievances and will be more agitated than other groups at the moment," Saad-Ghorayeb said. She said Aoun, still seen as the most popular Christian leader despite criticism from some for his strategic alliance with Hizbullah, is likely to capitalise on the Christian sense of marginalisation, and his appeal as a strong figure is likely to grow. Khoury said Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir was known to be furious that a list of potential candidates he drew up had been ignored. Sfeir had been reluctant to produce such a list but was prevailed upon by Lebanese leaders and French mediators. Throughout this crisis, it has become clearer that the patriarch's traditional kingmaker role has weakened. "The Christians are angry, but they are also weak and divided," Khoury said. He expected the crisis to drag on. "Maybe we'll end up with a president who can manage the crisis but he won't be able to solve it because it is a national and ideological crisis as well as a political one," he said. Hizbullah's weapons are the main bone of contention.
