Lebanon Confronts Partition Fears: Has Consociationalism Benefitted Minorities?

Abstract

Lebanese consociationalism has been under stress due to serious internal and external pressures. Though Lebanese regional and global leaders continue to pay lip service to Lebanon’s unity and uphold putative commitments to its sovereignty and territorial integrity, partition to resolve internal crises remains on the table. After a long and still unsettled civil war, absolute internal discord among citizens and, increasingly, the uprisings throughout the region, partition was and is once again openly discussed by many even if most camouflage it under the decentralization, federalism, or con-federalism schemes. The article underlines the inherent vulnerabilities of the Lebanese state and analyzes its deep fault lines raising a serious question about the future integrity of Lebanon.

Consociational Approach to Ethnic Resolution in Malaysia and Lebanon

“…Another strong element in this consociational politics is the segmental autonomy which was implemented from 1943 to 1975 which created a stable peace in the country. However, it was shattered by another civil war between Muslim and Christian that resulted about 150000 deaths and this had prompted the scholars to question the potency of consociational politics in preserving peace (Richard 1978;Salvador 2018). Lebanon Post Civil War (1975-1990 After the civil war (1975)(1976)(1977)(1978)(1979)(1980)(1981)(1982)(1983)(1984)(1985)(1986)(1987)(1988)(1989)(1990) the main elements of grand coalition remain intact including proportionality on the ratio of parliamentary seats, even though the Muslims expressed their dissatisfaction since it was taken based on 1932 populations (Salamey 2009) and Barclay (2007).…”