Abstract:
Lebanon’s соnsосiаtiоnаl pоlitiсal systems, intended to preserve power balance on the country’s sectarian lines, have instead deepened the paralysis of government, cronyism, and corruption. This study addresses the failure of Lebanon’s sectarian system while analyzing alternative approaches to governance that can promote unity and stability without undermining the effectiveness of the state.
This study is grounded on the potential impacts of decentralization, independence of the judiciary, and electoral reform on governance enhancement, reducing sectarianism as studied in Belgium, Switzerland, Tunisia, and Iraq. It evaluates political restructuring challenges and opportunities, learns lessons from successful federal and quasi-federal public administration systems, and examines potential pitfalls due to previous poor coordination planning. The findings illustrate that Lebanon requires a contextualized, step-by-step reform model. Specifically, it starts with judicial independence and proceeds with municipal decentralization, electoral changes, and anti-corruption initiatives, which can together catalyze a long-term shift toward a secular legal administrative transformation. By comparing the successes of decentralization in Belgium and Switzerland and the failure of the sectarian politics of Iraq and the bottom-up reforms of Tunisia, the study provides actionable solutions for Lebanon’s reform path. This study advocates a gradual transition to а more inclusive and meritocratic political system that prioritizes national interests over sectarian differences. It does not propose radical constitutional amendments, but rather a realistic roadmap that ensures effective institutional performance, promotes a civil state, and enables gradual secular integration, fostering a stable and inclusive society.
