Lebanon: An Ordinary “Consociational Democracy” in the Regional Context

Lebanon has a number of features that determine its special position in the region and its importance in the system of relations between the Middle East states. An important role in this is played by the ideological and strategic aspects of world politics in the region in which Lebanon is organically inscribed in both the historical and geopolitical plans. The stability of a country that has passed through a long civil war makes it stand out from a number of states in the region. The author's hypothesis is that the reason for the extraordinary stability — of Lebanese society, the system of state power, political elites, economic ties and foreign policy contacts, despite all the negative regional factors — can be rooted in the consociational principle of making key decisions based, paradoxically, on the notorious political confessionalism. The peculiarities of the Lebanese political model (although they are subject to well-deserved criticism) distinguish it from the multitude of “customary” democracies, bringing together with examples of the unique democratic systems of Europe and other continents. The motley confessional composition of society, along with the historically determined foreign policy guidelines of individual communities, suggested a special informal decision-making mechanism throughout the country — not on the basis of majority power, but on a contractual, compromise principle. Leading theorists of consociationalism often had in mind the Lebanese pattern of democracy in their political studies, and many of their developments are still well applicable for analyzing the functioning of the main state institutions of Lebanon. A theoretical study, along with an analysis of the current regional situation, convince the author of the correctness of the hypothesis put forward. Both in Lebanese history and now, it is the inveterate forms of external influences that forced Lebanese society to balance on the verge of aggravated intercommunal clashes. The combination of external factors served as the beginning and further warmed up the civil war. Heightened relations with Syria by 2005, the Israeli attack in 2006, the gravest threat from jihadi-caliphatists – all these factors have negatively affected intra-civil and inter-group relations. Stereotypical forms of use of religious communities (Shiites, Sunnis, Christians of different denominations, etc.) from the outside and even direct pressure from abroad continue to confront them, imposing ideas on social relations and political participation that are alien to Lebanese. Diversification of political and business contacts of Russia with representatives of different Lebanese communities can serve as a good example of Lebanon’s perception of all the features of its political system as a full subject of international relations.

1. Bahout J. 2013. Sectarianism in Lebanon and Syria: the dynamics of mutual spill-over. Peace Brief (US Institute of Peace), No. 159, November 15. Р. 1–4. URL: https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/PB159.pdf (accessed 26.08.2019)

2. Bogaards M. 2014. Democracy and Social Peace in Divided Societies: Exploring Consociational Parties. Palgrave Macmillan. 174 р.

3. Christophersen M. 2018. Implementation of the 2030 Agenda in Lebanon. Pursuing Sustainable Development under Sectarianism in Lebanon (International Peace Institute), Apr. 1. P. 6–24.

4. Dekmejian R.H. 1978. Consociational Democracy in Crisis: The Case of Lebanon. Comparative Politics. 10(2) (Jan.). P. 251–265.

5. Diss M., Zouache A. 2015. Une étude de la répartition du pouvoir confessionnel au Liban. Revue d'économie politique. 125(4) (juillet-août). P. 527–546. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.254.0527 URL: https://www.cairn.info/revue-d-economie-politique-2015-4-page-527.htm (accessed 26.08.2019)

6. El-Bacha M. 2009. Démocratie et culture politique libanaise. Confluences Méditerranée (L'Harmattan). Été. No. 70: Liban, de problèmes en crises. P. 71-87. www.doi.org/10.3917/come.070.0071. URL: https://www.cairn.info/revue-confluences-mediterranee-2009-3-page-71.htm?ref=doi (accessed 26.08.2019)

7. Fakhoury T. 2014. Debating Lebanon's power-sharing model: an opportunity or an impasse for democratization studies in the Middle East? Arab Studies Journal. XXII(1). Spring. Special Issue: Cultures of Resistance. P. 230–255.

8. Heydemann S., Bouyssou R. 2013. Après le séisme. Gouvernement économique et politique de masse dans le monde arabe. Critique internationale. No. 61 (octobre-décembre). P. 69–84. www.doi.org/10.3917/crii.061.0069 URL: https://www.cairn.info/revue-critique-internationale-2013-4-page-69.htm?ref=doi (accessed 26.08.2019)

9. Hudson M.C. 1967. A Case of Political Underdevelopment. Journal of Politics. XXIX (November). P. 836.

10. Koury E.M. 1976. The Crisis in the Lebanese System: Confessionalism and Chaos. Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. 92 p.

11. Lehmbruch G. 1974. A Non-Competitive Pattern of Conflict Management in Liberal Democracies: The Case of Switzerland, Austria and Lebanon. Consociational Democracy: Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies. Ed. by Kenneth MacRae. Toronto: McClleland and Stewart. P. 90–97.

12. Lehmbruch G. 2003. Verhandlungsdemokratie: Beitrage zur vergleichenden Regierungslehre. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. 217 p.

13. Lijphart A. 1969. Consociational Democracy. World Politics. 21(2) (Jan.). P. 207–225.

14. Lijphart A. 1981. Consociational Theory: Problems and Prospects. A Reply. Comparative Politics. Vol. 13. No. 3 (Apr.). P. 355–360.

15. Lustick I.S. 1997. Lijphart, Lakatos, and Consociationalism. World Politics. 50(1). 50th Anniv. Special Issue. Oct. P. 88–117. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100014738

16. Lustick I.S. 1979. Stability in Deeply Divided Societies: Consociationalism versus Control. World Politics. 31(3) (Apr.). P. 325–344.

17. Messarra A.N. 1983. Le modèle politique libanais et sa survie: Essai sur la classification et l’aménagement d’un système consociatif. Beyrouth: Universite Libanaise. XIV+535+12 p.

18. Party Elites In Divided Societies: Political Parties in Consociational Democracy. 1999. Ed. by Kurt R. Luther and Kris Deschouwer. London and New York: Routledge. (Routledge Ecpr Studies in European Political Science, 7). 294 p.

19. Renegotiating the Welfare State: Flexible adjustment through corporatist concertation. 2003. Ed. by Frans van Waarden, Gerhard Lehmbruch. London, New York: Routledge. 308 p.

20. Seaver B.M. 2000. The Regional Sources of Power-Sharing Failure: The Case of Lebanon. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 115. No. 2 (Summer). P. 247–271.

21. Yiftachel O. 1992. The State, Ethnic Relations and Democratic Stability: Lebanon, Cyprus and Israel. GeoJournal. Vol. 28. No. 3. The Middle East and the Emerging New World Order (November). P. 319–332.

22. Mueller D. 2015. Razum, religiya, demokratiya [Reason, religion, democracy]. Moscow, Mysl’. 560 p. (In Russ.)