By objectively looking at the controversy surrounding the Lebanese draft election law, one can see that the conflicting sides are trying to book powerful positions during the upcoming transitional stage. Indeed, Parliament must elect a new president of the republic by the time the regional and international balances in the post-Arab spring become clear. In addition, and later on this year, the elected council will have to act as a legislative and legal shield in the face of the major transformations surfacing on the horizon. This is how the excessive attention given to the electoral law can be understood, at a time when the sizes and weights of the sectarian powers are changing within their groups and among their supporters on one hand, but also vis-à-vis each other. Nonetheless, there is a major problem affecting the handling of electoral affairs, considering that the Lebanese politicians appear to be swimming in a barrel. At the end of the day, it is hard to come up with something meaningful from a shallow environment which lacks imagination and political and intellectual courage. Splashing and splatter is the most that can come out when one swims in a barrel, considering he can neither move forward nor backward. And this is the status of Lebanese politicians. As for what is known as the “Orthodox meeting draft law," which calls on each sect to elect its deputies, it summarizes the tragedy of the Lebanese Christians. Indeed, those standing behind this project are demanding the correction of Christian representation in Parliament. But their insistence on remaining within the context of the sectarian political system is merely deepening and enhancing it, instead of seeking exits from its predicaments. In other words, the guarantees granted to the Christians by the Taif Accord exceed the tasks of the constitution, as they are supra-constitutional guarantees based on a pact and aiming at preserving the Lebanese entity, regardless of the demographic realities. At this level, it would be useless to say that the alliance which governed Lebanon under Syrian tutelage went too far in exploiting these guarantees, thus limiting the Christian representation within the state in a catastrophic way whose repercussions are still seen until this moment. But the most tragic dimension of this political fate is seen in the impossibility of correcting Christian representation, without being obstructed by the blocked horizon of the Lebanese system, as well as the perception by the Muslim sects of their interests and shares, for which they have paid a hefty price in the previous wars. The acrobatics to which the Christian politicians are resorting to amend what cannot be amended in light of the current balance of powers, bring back to mind the swimmer in the barrel, but also the fact that the Christian divisions between the March 8 and March 14 camps reached their last scandal. Indeed, the Muslim allies will not relinquish their interests for the sake of the Christians, whose positions and importance are retreating on all levels, especially in light of the Arab revolutions which are pushing all the sides to seek the deepest trench while awaiting the passage of the storm. Hence, this is being done by the Shiites in March 8 and the Sunnis in March 14. Another and deeper facet of the Christian tragedy is that the Christians, who came up with Lebanon's meaning and founding legends, wrote its history out of nothing and created its art and policy to establish an entity guaranteeing their presence in this region, no longer constitute the decisive factor in the Lebanese equation, whether on the political, cultural or economic levels. They are a divided bloc that has lost its discourse, one whose most plain facets were inherited by leaders, the most prominent among whom is boring rather than seriously worth listening to. Behind this all, the roaring of the storm of the Arab spring for which Lebanon was not well prepared can be heard, and this storm will sweep its political system amid the prevailing inattention.
