Hariri resigns as Lebanon's prime minister-designate

Hizbollah's rejection of the cabinet Saad Hariri proposed earlier in the week is cited as reason for his departure.

Lebanon's President Michel Suleiman meets with Saad al-Hariri in Beiteddine village, Mount Lebanon.

BEIRUT // Saad Hariri, Lebanon's prime minister-designate, yesterday responded to the Hizbollah-led opposition's refusal to accept his proposed cabinet by resigning his post. The move was widely considered tough brinkmanship in a 73-day stalemate over the formation of a new government. Efforts by Mr Hariri to build a cabinet that included his political opponents have been stymied by both sides' refusal to compromise over which ministries, and which ministerial posts, would be allocated to Lebanon's diverse community of sectarian and political movements.

On Monday, Mr Hariri sent a formal proposal for a cabinet to President Michel Suleiman that was rejected by the opposition. The president had previously indicated that he would only approve a consensus cabinet. "Given that my commitment to forming a government of national unity has run up against difficulties that everyone now knows about, I announce that I have informed the president of the republic that I have abandoned trying to form a government," Mr Hariri told journalists in Beirut yesterday, according to news services.

"I worked for 73 days to achieve this objective but each time the rounds of negotiations were hampered one way or another," added Mr Hariri, saying the team he had proposed would have been a "real opportunity" but that this was "frittered away through conditions imposed" by the minority. Mr Suleiman accepted Mr Hariri's resignation and said he would pursue additional consultations with parliament. But as Mr Hariri's alliance still holds a considerable majority in that body, he can be reappointed to the post to begin again, if he chooses.

According to one of Mr Hariri's top supporters, the opposition's rejection of the first cabinet proposal was a mistake that they are likely to regret as it included compromises that are unlikely to be repeated in any subsequent deliberations. "We are back to point zero and we will have to look into a new formation and the balance it is going to have," said Amar Houry, a member of Mr Hariri's Future Movement.

"It will be hard for the rivals in the next government to get what they got in the last formation. They [already] received more than they deserved." Lebanon's complex sectarian system and long history of violent political conflict essentially mandates political co-operation among rivals, and although Mr Hariri's alliance won 71 of the 128 seats in parliament, he is widely seen as lacking the mandate to impose his political will.

"It's fairly unusual for the opposition to get to tell the winner of an election how to form a government," noted Paul Salem of the Carnegie Institute. "But the government cannot be formed without [Mr Hariri's] say-so. This is his way of reminding them of that." But Mr Salem noted that forming a cabinet was never likely to have been easy, considering the bitterly fought June elections and years of sectarian political struggle that preceded them.

"It's not very surprising as this has been a very contested situation since before the elections," he said. "There is a struggle inside and even outside the country to define the balance of things here." Mr Hariri's coalition is widely seen as pro-US and Saudi, whereas most of the opposition parties have close ties to Syria and Iran, making Lebanon's struggles a microcosm for the struggles between these regional rivals.

There was initial optimism that a deal could be forged after Mr Hariri was named premier on June 27 and a compromise was reached on the make-up of the national unity cabinet. With 15 seats to the majority, 10 to the opposition and five seats loyal to the neutral president, the formula met the requirements of all sides. But trouble began when Mr Hariri started selecting ministers to run specific portfolios.

While the opposition was irritated by Mr Hariri's insistence that he name the opposition and majority ministers, the most intractable conflict was over demands made by Hizbollah's top Christian ally, Michel Aoun. He vehemently insisted on a majority of the seven seats allocated to Maronite Christians, as well as demanding control of the critical interior and telecommunications ministries. It is widely believed that both Mr Hariri and Mr Suleiman have agreed that interior should remain in control of the current minister, Ziad Baroud, who is widely seen as neutral, and Mr Hariri is said to have rejected allowing Mr Aoun's son-in-law, Jibran Bassil, to remain as telecom minister. Lebanon's government-owned mobile phone networks represent a huge source of income for the state, and a proposal to privatise them could mean billions of dollars in revenue. But a key ally of Mr Aoun rejected the notion that his party was to blame for the impasse or that regional politics had played a role.

"I reject saying the [Free Pariotic Movement] is the obstacle in the formation, and I reject to say it's a regional problem as well," MP Ghassan Moukheiber told The National. "It is beyond that. There is a regional influence but for how long are we Lebanese going to wait to make a move? We all need to work on solving our problems for the sake of the country." And in keeping with a common talking point of the FPM, he warned that, by allowing this crisis to continue, Mr Hariri was threatening the stability of the country.

"It's the unknown we are now going though in Lebanon and I can't tell when we will have a government," he said. " I wish we had one a month ago. It's just not good at all, what happened today. It's taking us into crises." @Email:[e-mail]