by José Makary | Staff Writer
Presidential candidate and MP Michel Moawad lays out his vision for Lebanon and discusses his stances on the crises facing Lebanon in an interview with Outlook.
Hello Mr. Moawad, it is great to see you. First, the Outlook team at AUB would like to extend their sincere appreciation to you for taking the time to answer our questions on your candidacy for president of the Lebanese Republic and on how you intend to govern the nation, if elected.
Please take us through the main points in your presidential campaign emphasizing on the top 3 issues that a Moawad Presidency will focus on in the first 100 days? What you intend to do, if elected? How do you plan to unify and govern the country that is extremely divided and how do you plan to deal with the corruption that previous presidents dealt with?
MP Moawad: Thank you for being here and thanks to the Outlook team for the opportunity.
Uniting Lebanese people is achievable only through reinforcement of state institutions. When the state is weak, everyone goes back to their “tribe” or “confession”, and seeks through it internal and regional protections, as we are witnessing today. My project is to unify the Lebanese by rebuilding strong state institutions, building confidence, putting Lebanon on the track of growth, and bringing back hope and prospects to the Lebanese people. When you want to cure someone, you need to find the root causes behind his sickness. Lebanon should emphasize on four big axes to get out of the crisis and rebuild a strong state.
The first axis is the sovereign one that’s directly linked to three points: elaborating a roadmap to get everyone back to Lebanon and under the umbrella of state institutions that should have the monopoly of arms and strategic decisions. It also means reconciliating Lebanon with its Arab and international partners, dealing with the border demarcations and finally handling the refugees’ crisis.
The second axis is the governance of the country. One of our main problems comes from our way of implementing the constitution, which makes the country ungovernable. We have become a “vetocracy” in which the government is built on negative powers rather than positive ones. We need to go back to our constitution and the Taif, not the Doha agreement, and implement a functional model of governance built on a decentralized civil state which protects diversity through the creation of a Senate, with a special emphasis on the independence of the justice and of the administration, meritocracy, and accountability.
The third axis is the economy: we need to rebuild our free economy, but on a new productive and just economic model while redefining role of Lebanon’s economy in a new regional and international environment. We need to learn from our mistakes, we need to acknowledge that we lost competitive advantage in countless fields, but that there are also opportunities that we can build on – technology being one of them. The world and our Region have changed, and we need to adapt.
The fourth and last axis is dealing with the rebooting of the system through a suitable IMF plan. This is urgent as with each day passing with no deal in sight, the Lebanese people are paying a double price: not only are their deposits melting, but also hyperinflation is impoverishing them by the day. However, while we do need an urgent IMF deal, it should not be the one suggested by the government, which makes depositors bear most of the losses. We need a deal based first on accountability, which means making those who have stolen public money pay for what they did; second, on a fair distribution of losses starting with the banks, the State and the Central Bank – without selling state assets -, while protecting legitimate depositors money; and third, on structural reforms in the public sector (i.e. electricity, tax reforms, tax evasion, border smuggling, restructuring of the public sector, etc.). The solution must be comprehensive or it will go to waste. We must have an approach built on bringing back confidence and growing the economy which needs a comprehensive political, economic and financial plan based on the approach I am suggesting.
Today, Lebanon is a divided nation and the 2022 parliamentary elections resulted in a broken parliament unable to elect a president in a time during which most Lebanese people are under the poverty line.
You’ve mentioned during an interview on ” 30 عشرين” that many of our rights can’t be fulfilled unless “The Hezbollah Militia and its arms and the corrupt mafia are overthrown”. Mr. Moawad, your tough stance on Hezbollah’s arms made it hard for you to sway votes from the March 8 Alliance in favor of your candidacy. Why did you accept the run for president while recognizing that some critics say that your road to the Baabda Palace may be hindered by the composition of the current parliament?
MP Moawad: As an experienced politician with deep knowledge on how Lebanese politics work, I am totally aware of the difficulties for my road to Baabda. But let’s discuss the alternative paths suggested. The real question here is: Do we want any president to get elected?
The easiest road to the Baabda Palace is to be “as grey as possible”; in other words, not giving clear stances on any issue and working the traditional Lebanese way trying to please all concerned parties inside, and/or wait for an international compromise on Lebanon. Will that bring change, stability, progress, justice, or even a better quality of life to the Lebanese People? Is staying silent on the main problems that we are facing, and that I stated above, a solution to our country? The answer is No. It will bring a president controlled by Hezbollah on the one hand, and under the spell of the confessional parties’ interests on the other. This will only result into more instability, divisions, hatred, and impoverishment of the Lebanese people.
Mr. Moawad, you are a presidential candidate who is an ardent opposer of Hezbollah’s arms. Both of your voters in Parliament and based in Zgharta District are aligned with your stance on this matter. However, on the other hand, many Politicians believe that it is not achievable by internal forces but rather through regional agreements.
My question to you is what is your plan to disarm Hezbollah and how do you plan to represent those disagreeing with you on that matter, if elected?
MP Moawad: I believe that stating that the issue of sovereignty and arms outside of the state is only a regional matter is evading responsibility and avoiding the elephant in the room. I started my political life in Qornet Shehwan at a time during which we were calling for Syrian withdrawal. I still recall that the same argument was given even by proponents of our cause. People were telling that the Syrian occupation is covered by the regional and international powers, and that anything we would do internally would have no effect. It is now clear that the assassination of Rafik Hariri would not have led to March 14, had we not built the path of a unified cross sectarian opposition from Qornet Shehwan to the Bristol gathering. In fact, the assassination would have reinforced the Syrian grip just like it did with other assassinations including that of my father’s, President Rene Moawad. We should first rely on ourselves in this battle for sovereignty, and lobby for our cause in the international arena. Counting on regional agreements might come at the expense of Lebanon, or at most be limited to containing Hezbollah’s regional role.
Many of your critics claim that you do not have a clear or tough stance on other matters like the Lebanese Monetary and Financial Institutions that are to blame, according to those critics, for the current economic crisis. How do you respond to those accusations?
MP Moawad: My stance on the recovery has been consistently clear and I was always critical of the financial policies that are responsible for our collapse. In fact, now that things have become clearer, I am one of the very few MPs that the depositors’ association considers as a main partner. There have been, in the past, attempts – which worked for a while – to divide the public opinion into two clans: the ones in favor of the Diab-Mikati recovery plan(s) versus those who support the banks. I stated from the beginning that the solution lies in a third path that I have elaborated above. I acknowledge that this once was a difficult battle, but time has proved me right: it is now much clearer that any “solution” which is limited to a financial approach will end up making depositors bear the bulk of the losses – and not the banks who in all cases will have to lose their capital, and thus we would be refinancing the same political system with people’s money and that’s totally unacceptable.
Again, I plead for a comprehensive solution that includes sovereignty while reconnecting Lebanon with its regional neighbors and the international community – and that has a direct effect on our economy- structural reforms in public governance, a new economic model based on freedom, productivity and social justice, and financial restructuring plan with the IMF which protects legitimate depositors money.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the performance of Mr. Riad Salameh as Governor of the Central Bank, with 1 being an extremely bad performance and management and 10 being an extremely great performance?
MP Moawad: Much closer to 1 than to 10. Riad Salameh is not the only responsible for what happened, but he definitely bears a big part of it. He was, in a way, the CFO, and has unsustainably financed with depositors’ money a corrupt and failed system that was meant to collapse.
Former President Aoun travelled to Saudi Arabia on his first official diplomatic trip with hopes of strengthening the Lebanese-Saudi relations.
If you are elected president, do you also plan to travel to Saudi Arabia as your first official diplomatic trip?
MP Moawad: Restoring the relations between Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Arab countries is a high priority because it will result in direct economic and social consequences, since there is neither an IMF plan nor the possibility of an economic recovery and growth without the Gulf countries. Add to it that these countries host more than 500,000 Lebanese without whom, along with our diaspora across the globe, we would have been in a much more difficult situation. However, I would also be visiting from the beginning of my mandate the EU countries, the United Kingdom, the United States and any other relevant stakeholder as some of our main problems need the support of the international community and we must lobby for that.
For instance, solving the border demarcation issue, from the Shebaa farms in the South to the eastern and northern maritime and land borders, is essential for our strategic stability, so is solving the Syrian refugees’ crisis, and to achieve this we need international support. In a nutshell, my foreign policy would be built on a “Lebanon First” basis and our diplomatic relations with any country will be based on solving disputes and promoting common grounds on the basis of our strategic national interest.
A majority of the 12 “New MPs” have constantly refused to support your candidacy, criticizing your political track record of aligning with the Free Patriotic Movement in 2018 and coming from a family having participated in previous governments, while at the same time, some of them have floated names of candidates with the exact same record.
Why did you fail to persuade all the “New MPs” to vote for you?
MP Moawad: It is important to point out that a third of the New MPs decided to vote for me, if we count the vote of Dr. Rami Finge who was the first to come forward with his support before his election was overturned. As for the rest, I respect their opinion, and sometimes criticism, even though it has become clear that the arguments they use against me are inconsistent with the alternative choices some of them are suggesting. I won’t develop more on this matter because I believe my role is to unite. However, is a scattered opposition who’s refusing to build bridges – not only in the presidential battle but also on all institutional battles that we lost since the last elections – bringing a solution to the Lebanese people? The answer is clearly no and I, again, call for finding common grounds if we want to be relevant and bring change to the country.
Do you believe Dr. Issam Khalifeh is a serious candidate for president?
MP Moawad: I do not want to label candidates between serious and not serious, knowing that Dr. Khalifeh is, of course, a very respectable person and public figure. What I consider not serious is not the candidate himself, but those who are evading their responsibilities by switching candidates every week, or sticking to giving him six votes without prospects, which only leads to scattering the opposition forces and easing the pressure on the system and reinforcing it. In most democracies’ elections, there is a first and second round. In the first round, each political party brings in its candidate and often in the second round the parties come together to support the candidate who is the closest to their views.
Therefore, scattering the opposition’s votes in the Lebanese Parliament is making it impossible to change the balance of power, and eventually protecting the system.
Two of your children are pursuing their studies in the United States and a father definitely plays a crucial role in guiding his children in picking what is best for their future. You sent away your children instead of enrolling them in universities in their home country.
Did you lose faith in the Lebanese Educational sector and how would you improve it if elected president?
MP Moawad: The fact that two of my four children are studying abroad has nothing to do with my faith in the educational system in Lebanon. It is a personal choice they made and that I, of course, have supported – although it was a sacrifice for me, both financially and emotionally. Yet, I was very proud that they were accepted in very competitive universities.
As for the educational system in Lebanon, it has shown its resilience and will remain one of the main pillars of our economy. However, we need to protect and develop it. This means firstly catering for short term challenges: when it comes to the private sector, we need to find a solution to balance between quality education and affordability.
As for the public sector, and specifically the Lebanese university, we need to cater for its huge problem induced by the unsustainable $10 million allocation of the state budget. But it also means secondly and on the long-term rebuilding the ecosystem that will make Lebanon once again the main hub of education in the Arab world. We also need to adapt the educational system to our needs of building a productive economy. For instance, in order to solve Lebanon’s problem of importing 85% of its food needs, we can aspire to create a model close to the Dutch AI-based agricultural model in which universities are playing a pivotal role.
You are not only known to be a MP but also the head of the Rene Moawad Foundation (RMF). Can you describe what the NGO does? How has the NGO grown so much during that period of time and what are its main sources of funding?
MP Moawad: If I had to say one word about what RMF is doing, I’d say that the human being is at the center of our mission. This means on the one hand protecting this human being, and especially the most vulnerable, through humanitarian work, just like we’re doing in health, education & protection, as well as food security programs, or what we did during our interventions after the Beirut blast. Yet, on the other hand, our main mission consists of building capacities in a sustainable manner, and that’s what we’re doing for example through our programs which support local economies, SMEs, or agriculture.
Thus, RMF focuses in its nation-wide programs on fives sectors: education, health and humanitarian support, SMEs, agriculture, and developing local economies. Concerning our financing, more than 90% of our budget comes from international institutional donor agencies such as the German GIZ (our first partner in 2021), UN agencies like UNICEF, UNHCR, UNDP (our second partner in 2021), USAID (our third partner in 2021 and our most long-standing), as well as other partners like the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the EU, the French AFD, UK Aid and others. And the other 10% comes from Lebanese individuals and corporations – mainly from the diaspora network like ATFL (the American Task Force for Lebanon) or LIFE.
Put altogether, RMF is currently implementing more than 28 programs financed by around 50 institutions and has targeted in 2021 more than 500,000 beneficiaries. For those who are interested to learn more, more detailed information, in names and figures, are available on RMF’s website and social media platforms. I am proud to say that RMF is one of the most prominent NGOs in Lebanon today working on a cross-sectarian, cross political and cross-regional basis. Over 30 years, we have been able to develop an efficient and transparent platform gaining the trust of international donor agencies, the Lebanese diaspora, and corporate Lebanon.
There is a growing consensus that you were able to improve the lives of thousands of Lebanese through your leadership in the Rene Moawad Foundation by promoting rural, social, and economic projects across the nation.
Would you be able to have that impact as president of the Lebanese Republic?
MP Moawad: I hope so. I believe that part of the challenge and solution is to build an efficient, productive, transparent, and professional public sector. It’s very clear in all international ratings – before the crisis – that any indicator linked to the private sector would put Lebanon in the top 30 countries, while indicators linked to the public sector would rank us among the worst. We cannot build a country without an efficient public sector, and this is amongst our priorities.
Do you believe that this decade can be the right one to change our political system from a sectarian one to secularism?
MP Moawad: As I have mentioned before in the interview, and if elected, one of my priorities is to change the sectarian “vetocracy” and go back to Taif that opened the door to a decentralized civil state, which also protects our diversity through the establishment of a Senate. I believe that the approach stated above – civil state, decentralization, and Senate – if properly implemented, will bring the right balance between reinforcing citizenship, protecting diversity, and developing sustainable regional economies.
Can you name five potential candidates you would support for prime minister?
MP Moawad: Allow me not to go for the moment to into names. It might make things more difficult. However, I would utilize all my prerogatives, as president, to be a catalyzer amongst all parliamentary blocs to bring in a reformist prime minister who benefits from a strong support in Parliament. This is essential. A president alone is not sufficient to implement the deep structural changes needed. We also need a prime minister, as well as a proper government that is not based on any “quota system” or “Nizam Mohasasa” under the slogan of national unity.
For all the above, the role of the Parliament is key. Nothing will be done if we don’t put in place a sovereigntist and reformist parliamentarian platform that unites a majority of the current Parliament around common goals, while respecting our differences. Without building this majority, we will not have a change maker president elected, nor a reformist prime minister, nor a proper government, nor the possibility of implementing any of the above reforms. This is the real challenge we all need to acknowledge and fight for.
The views expressed in this article, like other works, do not reflect or represent the official position or stance of Outlook.