decline

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Feb. 28 (UPI) — Lebanon’s parliamentary elections, scheduled for May and widely seen as a new test for the country’s main political players, remain in limbo amid uncertainty over whether they will be held on time or postponed – and whether they will bring about any meaningful change.

While it will be the first election since Iran-backed Hezbollah was significantly weakened during the recent war with Israel, it is unlikely to alter the current balance of power.

Officially, Lebanon says it is ready to proceed on schedule. Most political parties have publicly committed to the vote, with the number of declared candidates for the 128-member parliament rising to 44 as of Friday.

However, as with many other issues in the country, Lebanese are divided over the electoral law and proposed changes concerning expatriate voting and the establishment of mega-centers allowing voters to cast ballots outside their home districts.

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Hezbollah’s main ally and leader of the Shiite Amal Movement, has refused to bring the proposed amendments put forward by his and Hezbollah’s political opponents to a vote.

The current law is largely inapplicable and requires one or two amendments — specifically, whether to allow or bar Lebanese expatriates from voting in embassies abroad for all 128 parliamentary candidates instead of just six — before it can be fully implemented, according to elections expert Nazih Darwish.

“In any case, it would require a parliamentary vote and cannot be implemented automatically,” Darwish told UPI.

The dispute over diaspora voting essentially revolves around equal political rights and the strategic calculations of political parties aiming to protect or increase their leverage.

Delaying the elections by a few months or postponing them for one or two years has emerged as a likely scenario, with each party trying to safeguard or extend its power.

At the heart of the matter is Hezbollah’s reduced influence, both militarily and politically.

If the delay is purely technical — such as moving the elections from May to July — it would not significantly affect the outcome, with one key exception: More members of the diaspora could participate, as many spend the summer in Lebanon, according to Karim Bitar, a lecturer at Saint Joseph University of Beirut and Sciences Po Paris.

Hezbollah, Bitar said, argues that diaspora voting could tilt the balance against it, as it cannot campaign effectively in many European and Western countries, where it is designated a terrorist organization and large Lebanese expatriate communities reside.

“Hezbollah remains a significant force. Even though it was severely weakened militarily, strong support for Amal and Hezbollah persists among their constituencies,” Bitar told UPI. “Supporters feel they must stick together and continue voting for the two parties to prevent rivals from exploiting their political and military setbacks.”

Although many of Hezbollah’s supporters acknowledge that the group was defeated in the war and should admit it, they still pledged to vote for its candidates.

“That’s because no serious political alternatives have emerged so far for Lebanon’s Shiite community,” David Wood, a senior Lebanon analyst at the International Crisis Group, told UPI.

The challenge is that while Hezbollah retains significant backing, not all Shiites in Lebanon support the group, and the existing Shiite opposition lacks a popular base and relies on backing from other groups.

Darwish argued that the balance of power in the country would remain unchanged as long as Hezbollah — which might lose at most two seats if the elections proceed as scheduled — is not fully disarmed.

“That could change if Hezbollah were to relinquish its weapons completely, but not before four to five years, when a genuine Shiite opposition is likely to emerge and succeed in convincing the Shiite base,” he said.

Postponing the elections would thus benefit the country’s main parties: Hezbollah would maintain its current parliamentary representation, while its opponents could wait for regional developments to shift further against Hezbollah and hasten its full disarmament.

“So, the logic would be that a postponement would actually suit Hezbollah’s opponents, because the group’s situation — both inside Lebanon and in the region — will only get weaker.” Wood noted.

What could accelerate the process is either the conflict between the United States and Iran — Hezbollah’s patron — or a deal affecting Iran’s proxies and regional role.

Other political parties, notably the Christian Lebanese Forces — Hezbollah’s main rival — were gearing up for the elections.

Jade Dimien, the Lebanese Forces deputy secretary-general in charge of elections, said the vote could bring change, provided the Lebanese people want it and are ready to make it happen.

Dimien said this year’s general elections would be shaped by major events of the past three years, including the Israel-Hezbollah war, the election of a new president, the government’s firm stance on Hezbollah’s disarmament and the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad‘s regime.

“There will be some big changes, but whether they will cause a major shift in the balance of power now, I don’t know,” he told UPI, noting the accelerated developments in the region and fearing “compromises” at the expense of Lebanon.

Separately, campaign financing emerges as another major challenge, with some parties favoring wealthy businessmen who can fund their own campaigns amid limited foreign funding.

While not new in Lebanese parliamentary elections, especially after the 1975-90 civil war, such financing has become increasingly visible today, fueled by the 2019 financial collapse.

“Foreign funding has been reduced … even Iran might not be willing under its current conditions to spend as much money supporting Hezbollah,” Bitar said.

The fear remains that wealthy candidates could buy their way into parliament — by paying for votes or providing clientelist services — thereby boosting the seat count of the most powerful parties.

Bitar warned of an even more alarming issue concerning the redistribution of losses following the collapse of the financial system in 2019.

“Major bank shareholders are trying to sway the vote by electing MPs who could block any IMF deal requiring them to cover their share of the losses,” he said.

One year into Donald Trump’s return to office, a wave of hardline actions – from volatile ICE raids to growing concern over political pressure on the media – has raised alarm about the expansion of the president’s power.

Then with US midterms approaching, attention is turning to whether there is any meaningful challenge to Republican grip on Congress.

So what happens next?

This week on UpFront, Marc Lamont Hill speaks with journalist and author Chris Hedges about Trump’s second presidency and whether US democracy is on the decline.

During their recent magical World Series run, the champion Dodgers had many heroes, but one constant.

Whenever they needed a leader, they found one.

No matter how dire the circumstances, whenever they needed a hero, somebody stepped up.

Yoshinobu Yamamoto won a game on zero day’s rest. Will Smith won a game with one hand.

Freddie Freeman was an 18th-inning savior on one leg. Kiké Hernández was a ninth-inning savior with a bad elbow.

Everywhere you looked, there was a veteran Dodger willing to sacrifice himself for the good of the team.

That needs to happen again.

That needs to happen now.

A player needs to spearhead a decision that will not be made by the big business that runs this team, a decision that will bypass the biased blather and directly connect to their many besieged fans, a decision that only a player can make.

In the wake of Thursday’s White House confirmation that the Dodgers will be making the traditional champions visit there this spring, somebody needs to send a clear message to President Donald Trump.

“No.”

Federal immigration agents stage outside Gate E of Dodger Stadium on June 19. Sporadic immigration raids continue to roil Southern California.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

No, they won’t go.

No, they will not support the ICE raids that are taking place daily just outside their clubhouse doors.

No, they will not openly support an administration that has declared war on its fan base.

No, after basking in the adulation of four million diverse neighbors every summer, the players will not turn their backs on these people while the government continues to round them up despite no criminal history.

This isn’t about asking pro athletes to be politicians. This is about asking them to be people.

Some will say players should not be involved, that it’s a management decision high above the pay grade of the average southpaw or slugger. But when their backyard becomes a battlefield, those players need to fight back, and that time is now.

Dodger management will always leave any tough choice like this one up to the players. By virtue of hundreds of millions of dollars of salaries, the players are essentially partners who need to embrace that responsibility.

No matter what owner Mark Walter says, if the players don’t want to visit the White House, they won’t go.

No matter who shouts the loudest, whether it be conservatives or liberals, the players’ collective voice is the only one that counts.

So, when spring training begins next week, here’s hoping for a hero.

After being showered with numerous curtain calls by an adoring fan base, it’s time for the players to return the favor.

How about a standing ovation for the brave law-abiding immigrant family of four that cheers you from in the left-field pavilion even though they know they could be arrested and hauled away at any time?

How about a, “Let’s Go Dodgers” chant for the longtime residents with no criminal record who spent last October huddled around their TV sets clinging to your victories as reason for hope?

How about being there for so many who have been there for you?

A protestor wearing a Mookie Betts jersey and waving a Mexican and American flag stitched together protests ICE outside the Dodger Stadium game on June 21.

(Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times)

This was an issue last year, when former Times columnist Dylan Hernández urged the Dodgers to cancel their initial White House visit.

“This was something we discussed with all the players, all of whom wanted to go,” team president Stan Kasten told Hernández. “Remember, everyone in here grew up wanting to be a world champion and all the things that come with it, and it comes with a champagne toast, silliness in the locker room, a parade, rings, an invitation to the White House. It’s what they all come to associate with being world champions. Everyone wanted to go, and so we did.”

So they went, all of them except an injured Freddie Freeman. The event was even attended by Mookie Betts, who had previously declined a visit when he was with the Boston Red Sox.

Since then, the landscape has dramatically changed in light of the ICE raids that ramped up during the middle of the season.

This is no longer simply about the rebuke of a president. This is about a fight against a system that has consistently terrorized southern California streets and recently, in Minneapolis, resulted in the deaths of two American citizens at the hands of agents of the American government.

Surely the Dodgers clubhouse leaders see this. Surely they feel this.

They can’t be so insulated that they don’t notice the protests in city streets that resemble those near Chavez Ravine. They can’t be so sheltered that they don’t hear the outrage from people who look just like their biggest fans.

The players can’t hide from this. The players need to handle this.

And, no, it’s not even up to manager Dave Roberts, who last week told the Times’ Bill Shaikin that he supports the visit.

“I was raised — by a man who served our country for 30 years — to respect the highest office in our country,” Roberts said. “For me, it doesn’t matter who is in the office, I’m going to go to the White House.”

Again, this is no longer about just Trump. This is about Tom Homan and Greg Bovino and Kristi Noem and all the other immigration officials that have wrought so much unfounded havoc.

Baseball clubhouses have traditionally leaned heavily to the right.

Nobody is asking anybody to disavow their beliefs. This is no longer about ideology, this is about standing up for those who are being wrongly arrested, being unfairly harassed or being made to feel constantly frightened in their own homes.

Dodger Stadium is one of those homes, and those who permanently live there need to do their best to provide comfort and safety for those who don’t.

Dodgers veteran leaders, this is your time.

Their White House visit would probably occur during the team’s trip to play the Washington Nationals in the first week of April. Here’s hoping that before the road trip, the secure and well-paid Dodgers veterans let the team’s kids understand what it means to be a Dodger and how declining a White House visit would be the Jackie Robinson thing to do.

Sending a title team to the White House is baseball tradition. Sending a message about equality and fairness and freedom is a Dodgers tradition.

Somebody in a Dodgers uniform needs to stand up for that tradition.

Anybody?