Lebanon, which has been in a presidential vacuum since October 30, 2022, finally got its fourteenth president.

It is difficult for a poor, fragmented and weak country like Lebanon, where the presidency is the most important part of its government, to remain without an administrator for more than two years.

Joseph Aoun, the country’s army chief, was finally elected by Lebanon’s parliament as president. Aoun is being backed by several key political parties inside the country, as well as US, France, and Saudi Arabia in international affairs.

Aoun was sworn in as the president after winning 99 votes from the 128-member parliament and will remain in this position for six years.

While the parliament held thirteen special sessions over the past two years, it failed to elect a president. Aoun is the fourth military figure from the Maronite Christians who sits on the Lebanese presidential seat. Being a military man made him stay out of political circles and enter the field as a “cross-party candidate” and win the votes of many political currents.

Here are three points over selection of Aoun:

Frist:

Hezbollah fell short of its previous position, which if this does not indicate its weakness, it shows its flexibility. Of course, according to his critics, this flexibility is due to the weakness that has emerged after the attacks of Israel.

Hezbollah and the Amal Movement are two Shiite parties that have 27 seats in the parliament. Salmian Faranjieh, the leader of al-Murda movement, was the candidate of Amal and Hezbollah, who withdrew from the competition. While he entered the campaign in June 2023, he did not get votes and did not give his opponent a chance to win. One reason for delaying the election of the president was the difference between the candidates of Hezbollah and Amal and the candidates of other groups.

As a Maronite Christian, Franjieh had a favorable view of Hezbollah, Iran, Syria and the so-called “axis of resistance” whose victory was unacceptable to the United States of America, France and Saudi Arabia. These five countries are mentioned because the foreign factor acts more strongly than the domestic factor in directing the developments in Lebanon.

Now this time, Farnjieh refrained from entering the elections and supported Aoun – which made the latter win. It is clear that if the two Shiite currents had not shown flexibility, it is very likely that Aoun would not have won either.

For example, he got 71 votes in the first round and failed to get two-thirds of the votes (86 votes), Because the Shiite representatives were content with refusing to vote – but in the second round, after getting their consent, he managed to get 99 votes, while he needed 65 votes.

But since he was the head of the army, he could not become the president based on the provisions of the constitution, and he still needed two-thirds of the votes. Of course, it happened in 2008 as well, when Michel Suleiman, the commander of the army at the time, was a candidate for the presidency, the speaker of the parliament announced that if he won more than two-thirds of the votes in the second round, he would waive the amendment of the constitution, which happened.

Now it seems that this has become a tradition. Amal and Hezbollah apparently fell short because their candidate had no chance of winning and the latter is under more internal and external pressure than ever before. Maybe they did so in exchange for receiving promises or because they had no choice.

Second:

Although Aoun won the support of two Shia currents in the second round, after his victory, he made some points in his speech that were not pleasing to Hezbollah – it is in the situation that this group has been weakened and trying to revive it is time-consuming and costly.

The new president of Lebanon said “I will use my role as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces to confirm the government’s right to carry weapons. We should not rely on the outside to bully each other.”

If you pay a little attention, you can understand that Aoun is referring to Hezbollah, because when it comes to the disarmament of militias and the monopoly of weapons in the hands of the government, this group can be the target. It is also Hezbollah that does not respect the rulers of Beirut and other groups and bullies Aoun. Because the arsenal has weapons that the Lebanese army does not have. When Aoun talks about external forces, he apparently means Iran because it supports Hezbollah.

More importantly, Aoun played a role in the ceasefire talks between Hezbollah and Israel. The Lebanese army is also responsible for implementing the provisions of the ceasefire agreement. Being a military man, he understands well the importance of arms monopoly in the hands of the government, and the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council are also available in the field.

Therefore, it is not unlikely that he will make efforts to disarm Hezbollah, evacuate southern Lebanon from the presence of this group’s militias, strengthen the army, etc.; so as to arouse the dissatisfaction of the supporters of this group. If he did not do so in the past, it was because he was not in a decision-making position and perhaps, he did not want to involve the army in doing something that he could not handle. Now what is helping him is the support of America, the different UN resolutions, the absence of Bashar Assad and the weakness of Hezbollah.

Third:

Saudi Arabia’s greed for role-playing is also interesting. Aoun is on the receiving end of Riyadh’s support. It is even said that he made his financial aid to Lebanon conditional on his victory. America and France also wanted Aoun’s victory, which would pave the way for Riyadh to act in Lebanon.

While the Saudi rivals (Iran and Qatar) were looking for other options: Franjieh and Elias Albusiri, as mentioned in (first analysis), Farnjieh was the candidate of the Shiites, which is also favorable in Tehran’s opinion, but he withdrew. But al-Basiri, who is supported by Qatar, went against Aoun and did not get a vote.

More importantly, Yazid bin Farhan, adviser to the Saudi Foreign Minister, has been in Lebanon for a few days now, and his role was prominent in Aoun’s victory. Even one of the members of the Lebanese Parliament wrote the name of Ben Farhan on the ballot as “Joseph Amos Ben Farhan” and showed it to others. All this indicates the presence of Riyadh in the context of developments in Lebanon, something that can be interpreted as unfavorable space for Tehran and Doha.

All in all, the political deadlock in Lebanon was broken and now there is a promise of political opening. Now it is expected that Beirut will be removed from the conflict of interests of major regional and global powers and sectarian conflicts in order to find a way to get rid of the current chaos.

A ‘security meeting’ was held in Israel concerning Türkiye’s growing influence in the Middle East, following the Nagel report, which recommended preparations for a possible conflict with Türkiye.

According to two Israeli officials who spoke to The Jerusalem Post, the meeting addressed Türkiye’s increasing regional influence and its potential effects on Israel.

The meeting was attended by Israeli Defence Minister Yisrael Katz, Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, and several senior officials.

The discussions focused on assessing whether Türkiye’s growing influence represented a change in the level of threat to Israel. An Israeli official revealed that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also expected to convene a separate meeting in the coming days to address the same issue.

In its latest report on Israel’s defence budget and security strategy, the Nagel Committee, established under Netanyahu’s instructions, advised that the Tel Aviv administration should prepare for a ‘possible war’ with Türkiye. Presented to Netanyahu, Defence Minister Katz, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, the report claimed Türkiye was pursuing ambitions to regain its Ottoman-era influence. It further suggested this could heighten tensions with Israel and possibly lead to conflict.

The report warned of the risk of Syrian opposition groups allying with Türkiye to form a powerful new threat to Israel’s security. It stated, “The threat from Syria could become even more dangerous than the Iranian threat.”

To address these challenges, the report recommended increasing the defence budget by up to 15 billion shekels (approximately $4.14 billion) annually over the next five years. This would help counter threats posed by Türkiye and other regional challenges.

Commenting on the report, Netanyahu stated, “We are witnessing fundamental changes in the Middle East. Iran has long been our biggest threat, but new forces are entering the arena, and we must be prepared for the unexpected. This report provides us with a road map for securing Israel’s future.”

The report emphasized the need for Israel to strengthen its military capabilities in anticipation of a potential conflict with Türkiye. It specifically recommended acquiring additional F-15 fighter jets, refuelling aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and satellites to bolster Israel’s long-range strike capacity.

U.S. President Joe Biden and his administration, soon to be succeeded by Donald Trump, have decided to relax the stringent sanctions regime on Syria, which has been in place for years, in favor of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), following the ouster of Bashar al-Assad.

The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued General Authorization No. 24, signifying a major shift in U.S. sanctions policy towards Syria.

This new authorization, valid until 7 July 2025, eases restrictions on specific transactions involving Syria. For instance, transactions with Syrian administrative institutions will be permitted starting 8 December 2024. Key provisions of the authorization include authorization for the sale, supply, storage, or donation of energy resources, such as oil, natural gas, and electricity, to or within Syria, and permission for processing non-commercial personal remittances to Syria, including through the Central Bank of Syria.

However, military and intelligence organizations remain excluded. Transactions involving the governments of Russia or Iran, as well as their goods or services, are still prohibited. Additionally, importing Syrian petroleum products into the United States remains banned, and new investments in Syria are restricted, with limited exceptions for employee salaries.

This new policy represents a considerable easing of sanctions, potentially allowing U.S. allies in the region to offer humanitarian assistance, engage in economic reconstruction, and increase interaction with Syria’s governing institutions.

Speaking to Reuters yesterday, Maher Khalil al-Hassan, HTS’s trade minister, stated that Syria has struggled to secure deals for importing fuel, wheat, and other essential commodities due to strict U.S. sanctions, despite interest from many countries, including Gulf Arab states. Al-Hassan mentioned that Syria’s new leadership has managed to amass enough wheat and fuel to last several months but warned of an impending “catastrophe” if sanctions are not suspended or lifted soon.