Murr statements reveal a crack in the opposition front

 

The March 14 coalition and the opposition each have their own internal political difficulties, which is normal in new alliances and political groupings. What has become apparent recently, however, is that March 14 does a better job addressing its own internal divisions. The March 14 coalition, for example, has put its agenda clearly on the table, releasing at the 2008 Beirut Spring Conference last week a political memorandum to highlight the movement’s common goals.

 

The opposition, on the other hand, appears weighed down by internal differences and potential divisions. This was most recently demonstrated by Change and Reform bloc MP Michel al-Murr’s criticisms aimed at other MPs in his own bloc.

 

 

Murr said last week that “people are fed up” with some politicians in the bloc “because they obstruct the presidential elections.” The statement was then followed by another earlier this week, in which Murr said that if he was not invited to the Change and Reform bloc meeting Monday evening, “I will go back to my post in the Metn – which is an independent position – and decide my policy based on my opinions, irrespective of others.”

 

Murr never received that invitation and so did not attend the meeting in Rabieh Monday evening.  Aoun instead explained that invitations were never sent out and that the bloc met at the same time and place every week. Invitations, therefore, were standing.  Murr was welcome to come if he wanted to.

 

Murr’s statements, also, were not unlike one made last week by Higher Islamic Shia Council representative Ali al-Hassan, who is considered to be close to Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. Hassan said that the Christian fear of the presidential vacuum is caused by “the Christian negotiator” who thinks that he represents 70% of the Christians. Few have any doubts that he was hinting at Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun.

 

Both Murr and Berri have made it quite clear that they disagree with one or more of Aoun’s positions. Berri, for his part, wants a swift solution to the presidential crisis in order to salvage the state’s institutions, especially the parliament. He also did not approve of the additional conditions, like a consensus over a parliamentary electoral law before presidential elections, put forward by Aoun at the last quartet meeting.

 

As for Murr, some analysts believe that he was initially discouraged when his Change and Reform bloc declined to elect Army Commander General Michel Sleiman president when it had that chance. Murr had, in fact, been the one behind Sleiman’s nomination. Other analysts, however, say the problem is more personal, that he is trying to guarantee a ministerial portfolio for his son, Elias al-Murr, now more or less allied with the March 14 majority.

 

Speaking to NOW Lebanon, Al-Mustaqbal columnist Nasir al-Asaad said that Murr has distanced himself from the bloc, because he cannot put up with Aoun’s politicking any longer. “He has to take the Metn popular mood into consideration, in addition to the fact that Aoun turned against him by not supporting Sleiman, Murr’s nominee for presidency,” he explained.

 

Asaad believes that Murr’s new position indicates that he might form a new alliance in the Metn, perhaps with Kataeb President Amin Gemayel. “He probably won’t join March 14 but will change his alliances, will would make a difference in the next parliamentary election,” Asaad speculated.

 

Media reports, meanwhile, predict that more clashes between the bloc’s MPs will surface in the wake of Murr’s statements and his possible withdrawal from the bloc. The opposition affiliated daily Al-Akhbar cited parliamentary sources saying that the clash might get worse in the coming days and could lead to further internal divisions. The daily added that this might result in the withdrawal of other MPs from the bloc.

 

Change and Reform MP Ibrahim Kanaan, however, told NOW Lebanon that Murr’s statements do not reflect a total breakup of the bloc. “Although he is free to express his opinion, he should know that when you are part of a certain bloc, you should respect certain rules that would keep the discussion inside the bloc,” he said. “Murr shouldn’t be waiting for an invitation to go back to his independent position in Metn,” he added.

 

 

Change and Reform MP Nematallah Abi Nasr told NOW Lebanon that the situation would be different if the Christians “were united like the other sects.” He also said that the whole Maronite community should be held accountable for not trying to unite behind one clear national vision. “We only hope that Murr comes back to the bloc’s discussions and brings his accusations to a close,” he added.

 

Though the Lebanese opposition is made up of both Muslims and Christians, it has primarily been Christians taking the stage in recent weeks to square off against March 14.  For their part, both Hezbollah and Syria, Aoun’s two strongest allies have been happy to see the cameras focused on the FPM head.  The logic goes that if Aoun manages to perform a miracle and get March 14 leaders to concede to his demands, then all of the March 8 and the opposition will have won, but if Aoun fails – as he so likely will – then, once again, only the Lebanese Christians will have been the losers.

Now in a position to look back on month after month of failed initiatives, some Change and Reform bloc MPs have finally recognized this truth. This is one reason why these tensions have come to the surface within the Change and Reform bloc.

 

In addition to Murr’s criticisms, Change and Reform MP Ghassan Mokheiber criticized Hezbollah’s arms last week. “Only the Lebanese authorities should be allowed to control weapons… A state cannot be built if it does not have exclusive control over arms,” he said, in contradiction to his party’s February 2006 Memorandum of Understanding with Hezbollah. Mokheiber also denounced Syrian interference in Lebanon’s affairs during the Dakar Summit last week.  Free Patriotic Movement official Alain Aoun, furthermore, said last week that he supported the appointment of MP Saad Hariri as prime minister in a new government, contradicting his uncle, Michel Aoun.

 

Murr’s rhetoric of late points to a deeply rooted problem within the opposition: the opposition does not share a united vision for either change or reform as their bloc’s name might suggest.  Their alliance is temporary and only serves immediate and personal agendas. In the name of partnership, the opposition leaders have gathered around only imaginary goals.  Realizing this, Murr has begun to hedge his bets and will hopefully be returning, as threatened, to the Metn to try once again and see what it is his constituents want.  There, as the political landscape has changed considerably since the 2005 parliamentary elections, he will likely find that residents no longer want their elected officials to report to “the General.”