Lebanon's Presidential Dilemma
Lebanon remains without a president, as the parliament once again postpones the decision for next friday. General Suleiman has been described as a possible compromise candidate, however, his position in the military raises some concerns, as this cartoon alludes to. What does this mean for the stability and future peace of Lebanon and the region? What the are deeper issues impacting the two sides inability to compromise? Are foreign powers influencing the political situation in Lebanon? Why are the two sides unable to reach an agreement over a presidential candidate? These crucial questions are usually absent from media coverage of the presidential dilemma. Most coverage has been limited to a statement of the current indecision between the two factions and not much else.
Recent articles on the BBC and the CNN websites present little information regarding the reasons for the dilemma. This lack of context produces articles that represent the situation in Lebanon as an issue of a dichotomy between pro-Western and anti-Western blocs. Both BBC and CNN utilize the labels of pro-Western and pro-Syrian to describe the two factions in dispute, without clarifying the why these labels are affixed to the ruling bloc and the opposition. The CNN and BBC use of pro-Western versus pro-Syrian to describe the two factions alludes to what these factions represent to Western governments, as well as what they are not. The pro-Western ruling bloc implies a willingness and desire to cooperate with American and European interests in the region, while the pro-Syrian opposition implies an anti-Western stance, and, possibly, a threat to Western interests. These labels seem to function as an alert to readers as to which faction should be trusted and supported.
How the media has covered the situation Lebanon can be compared to Western coverage of the situation in Gaza and the West Bank. Media outlets have simultaneously praised Abu Mazen's willingness to engage in negotiations with the Israeli government and his stance in opposition to Hamas and condemned the Hamas' continued control over Gaza. While the PLO is presented as a possible partner in negotiations and the creation of peace, Hamas is labeled as an extremist, anti-Western movement. Like in the case of Lebanon, the dilemma in Palestine is represented as an issue of two opposing sides, with only one side that can be engaged by Western governments.
