Can the FPM find purpose with Baabda off the table?
MP Michel Aoun and his Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) have had a single overriding goal since the party”s founding nearly five years ago: to pave the way for his rise to the presidency. It has been no secret, and indeed they have made public announcements on several occasions, that the only presidential candidate they fully supported was Aoun.
Now that Parliament has elected Michel Sleiman as president, and its once populous fan-base is beginning to dwindle, the FPM must take action quickly to re-orient the party and answer many important questions. Can Aoun run again in six years? If not, what is the FPM”s new aim? Has too much time been spent marketing Aoun rather than the party? Is there an FPM without Aoun?
There are obvious answers to some of the questions, but ones that need to be formalized nonetheless.
For example, there are few scenarios in which Aoun, who was born in 1935 and will subsequently be 79 years old in six years, will be a viable candidate for the presidency in 2014. Assuming Aoun will not run for president in 2014, the FPM must transform from a vehicle designed to deliver Aoun to the presidency into an entity that has more sustenance and political views than him alone.
The FPM”s current charter reads like an off-the-shelf manifesto, with generic goals such as "people are individuals," "people are born equal and die equal" and "to guarantee Lebanese sovereignty." This will need to change, in order to define a unique concept and mission.
While up until now most of the FPM”s decisions, and even debatably its political alliances, have been guided by the question of which decision would increase Aoun”s chances to become president, now deliberations may need to take place in a different matter.
The FPM has choices. It could, for example, build a niche for itself as an on-the-fence party that would moderate between the March 14 and March 8 factions. Or it could continue to develop its current alliances and serve a joint Christian-Shiite constituency. Numerous other options exist as well, although none are as clear-cut as the goal of a Aoun presidency.
Over the next six years, FPM members, recruiters and supporters are going to have a tougher time persuading the voting public (notably Christians) that there is more to their party than the now-defunct dream of a Michel Aoun as president, that they have more to offer. The really difficult question will be: What else can the FPM offer?
The 2009 parliamentary elections will no doubt be a make-or-break event for the FPM. It will have a much more difficult time convincing people to vote for a party which is losing ground daily, rather than one led by a president in waiting, as appeared to be the case during the 2005 elections. This is further confirmed by the pre-emptive campaigning and rallies being organized by Aoun. It seems clear to all, including Aoun himself, that there is a lot at stake for his movement.
The problem facing Aoun, and the FPM for that matter, is that unlike most typical Western democracies, Lebanon”s voting public, unlike its leaders, are not particularly swayed by external factors such as US foreign-policy shifts, the economy and UN resolutions. Instead, the prevailing system is one of political inheritance in which the majority of votes are won and lost through last-minute political and feudal alliances.
This system may well work against Aoun and the FPM in the next election. Although he is doing very well among certain groups, such as Shiites in Kesrouan and Metn, and Tashnak loyalists in the Armenian community, Aoun”s bread and butter – middle- and upper-class Christians who have only relatively recently become politically active – are beginning to have second thoughts. The situation has not been aided by Michel Murr”s recent deviation, the row with Bkirki, and his inability to reach the presidency.
It is difficult to imagine a core voter for the Lebanese Forces or the Phalange Party changing camps. Decades of family tradition and voting habits are to be considered. Also, the Lebanese Forces especially seems to have significant momentum on its side. On the other hand, Aoun”s Christian base, which is to some extent relatively new, seems to be showing signs of weakness.
Aoun”s claim to the Christian majority is threatened, if not lost. However, the next election will define his legacy: Will he prove to have been the founder and cornerstone of a sustainable political entity that will continue beyond 2009, or simply the presidential favorite who never was?
The only thing certain is that his strategy must change if he hopes to avoid a major defeat in 2009, and even then, it must be a strategy that focuses more on the FPM”s other MPs and less on Aoun himself. This is something that he has thus far seemed unable to do. What apparently is not evident to Aoun and FPM members is that to preserve the ideology and long-term goals that Aoun stands for, he needs to begin to stand aside.
Rabih Haddad, an activist with the Phalange Party, wrote this article for THE DAILY STAR. The views expressed herein are his own and not necessarily those of the Phalange.