Next May, Beirut is set to face its fifth municipal election since the war—assuming the elections take place. All signs indicate that they will, given the firm insistence of the President and the government.
After the Beirut Municipal elections in 1998 and 2004, which were made possible with the support of late Prime Minister Rafic Hariri during the Syrian tutelage, there was a strong desire to maintain political parity within the municipality, without seeking to enforce it through law. Former Prime Minister Saad Hariri continued these efforts and played a central role in fostering broad consensus among the municipality's various factions during the 2010 and 2016 elections.
The municipal elections today take a different trajectory, with parity under threat, as political consensus remains elusive. In 2016, despite the narrow margin between the authority list and the “Beirut Madinati” (Beirut, My City) list, which nearly disrupted the outcome in certain areas, the tradition of political parity was upheld. While largely symbolic in terms of municipal projects and initiatives, this balance carries immense significance for the capital as Lebanon’s face to the world.
Currently, there is no political consensus to maintain the existing status quo, and for the first time since the Taif Agreement, political parity is under threat amid deepening polarization. This poses a significant risk to coexistence, particularly in the capital.
The absence of political consensus follows a series of proposals in recent years to divide the Beirut Municipality, which have been rejected by several key stakeholders, particularly the Sunni community. They consider themselves the guardians of the municipality and its primary face, due to the Sunni majority among Beirut’s voters and their historical prominence in coastal cities.
While the proposal to divide Beirut, incorporating surrounding areas such as Ain el-Remmaneh, Shiyah and Ghobeiri, to create three major components for Greater Beirut, has been discussed, alternative options aim to preserve the municipality as a whole while ensuring natural and balanced coexistence. The most viable proposal, set to be debated in the upcoming regular session of Parliament starting next week, is to divide Beirut into 12 electoral districts, forming a unified Municipal Council of 24 members. Each district would have two seats on the council, with candidates selected based on the sectarian majority in each area. This solution would maintain political parity in the capital and its Municipal Council, ensure fair representation of the historic neighborhoods, support balanced development and facilitate the implementation of municipal projects.
Any alternative proposal may fail to guarantee the purpose of municipal elections, which should pave the way for reform and decentralization rather than fueling perceptions of marginalization.
Amid intense competition for municipal control and lack of unity, Hezbollah and its allies currently wield the greatest electoral leverage in Beirut. This advantage could allow them to secure a full municipal list. The question remains: Will Hezbollah seize control of the Beirut Municipality, despite everything that has transpired, and gain the upper hand in representing the capital’s development, given the ongoing divisions among its opponents in reaching a logical solution to the municipal crisis?
Comments