Lebanon’s Power-Sharing System and the Rise of Sectarianism

Abstract

Power-sharing settlements intended to prevent recurring conflicts in divided societies have produced mixed outcomes. For decades, Lebanon’s power-sharing political system has been blamed for political instability, sectarian division, recurring conflicts, and foreign intervention. Lebanon today is an example of a confessional divided state where growing sectarian identity has triggered inter-community mistrust. The increasing sectarian division and conflicts since Lebanon gained its independence from France in 1943 has been attributed to the power-sharing political system.This essay, however, demonstrates that the root of the conflicts is the manipulation of that system by the political elites, by virtue of their strategic positions in the government, and political sectarian organizations and movements are capable of influencing political processes considerably. Through manipulative schemes of the power-sharing system, political elites were successful in transferring the power from the state to the religious sects and their political representatives, and thus reinforced sectarian division, weakened the state, and delayed the transition to full democracy. This essay takes Lebanon as a case study to show that although a power-sharing agreement has the power to reduce the risk of recurring conflicts, it has the tendency to reinforce sectarian division leading to deterioration of national unity.