Beirut "election" or Tribal bay`ah? Lebanese pollster `Abduh Sa`d was right today. This was no election, he said. It was more of a tribal acclamation ritual (bay`ah); no surprises and 9 out of the 19 candidates won their seats prior to election day. I meant it when I said that there were more candidates per seats in the last election for Syrian (rubber stamp) parliament than in this Lebanese election. One can argue, as the Hariri and Saudi media argued, that Beirut said its word, in favor of Hariri. This reminds me. There is no Lebanese media source from which you can really learn about Lebanon these days. Certainly not in the Hariri (father or son or grandson) era. The Hariri, Inc cut their teeth in media management at the feet of the House of Saud. Former prime minister Salim Huss told me in the 2000 election that every newspaper in Lebanon except one was receiving money from Hariri. Now, there are none that are independent of Hariri money. Yes. Every radio, newspaper, magazine, and TV is fully or partially owned by Hariri, Inc, except the communist Party's radio, Sawt Ash-Sha`b, and New TV, which only recently resumed its criticisms of the Hariri, Inc. They suspended their attacks after Hariri's death. I know, Hariri sold his share in AnNahar; but that does not matter. He took An-Nahar's director-general (he does not have the talent or competence to be editor-in-chief, and staff almost rebelled when he expressed desire in the position), the rabid right-wing fanatic Jubran Tuwayni, on his ticket. And Hariri's shares in AnNahar were bought by Al-Walid bin Talal. It is very difficult to get independent analysis or views that are not tied to the financial interests of Hariri. I was told that Sa`d Hariri summoned the publishers and editors of Lebanese media outlets one by one over the last several weeks, and did what his father used to regularly do: gave them "subsidies." Yes, all of them. Furthermore, most if NOT all, the Beirut-based correspondents of Arab media are also beneficiaries of Hariri subsidies. Remember that the Economist (the best magazine there is) said that Hariri spent $100 million before his death on media ownership and manipulation in Lebanon. But was it really a Hariri victory even with the Minister of Interior and the Minister of Justice supervising the elections although they both were functionaries of Hariri's campaigns in past years. The Minister of Interior appointed an official of the "Progressive Socialist" Party of Jumblat--what a name for a party that neither is progressive or socialist--to be in charge of polling places in Ba`abda-`Alayy electoral district--a key district for Jumblat. Such are the rules of Lebanese fake democracy. But the turnout was certainly a big defeat for Hariri, Inc who made it very clear that they wanted a huge turnout. Sa`d Hariri said so in all of his speeches, in which he was affecting his newly acquired Beiruti accents (see post below, NOW). So according to the Hariri official, who doubles as Minister of Interior, the official voters' turnout was a mere 28%. That is lower than the year of 2000 when elections were held under Syrian control. This only proves that Lebanese conditions can even worsen, believe it or not. So 117,000 Lebanese voted in this Beirut round of the election out of the 421,000 potential voters. Certainly, the ministry of interior was not expecting that low of a turnout because they prepared 250,000 voting cards. They were that optimistic about turnout. And you thought that we have low voters' turnout here in the US? It is a political stance, though not always--hangovers can sometimes be a factor, for voters to decline to vote. But for such a large number of voters to boycott the elections is a clear political signal. There are many factors. It is true that Christian and Armenian boycott was a factor; Gen. `Awn's supporters effectively lobbied Christian voters to stay home, as did the major Armenian party, the Tashnak. Hariri simply said that the Tashnak (like all Armenian parties and movements in Lebanon they are moderates) cannot be invited to his list because they did not participate in the Hummus Festival on March 14th. Perhaps Hariri is prejudiced against the Armenians because the wife of the Lebanese silent president, Lahhud, is Armenian. But the voters' turnout was low not only in Christian areas but also in Muslim areas. In some Christian areas it was no more than 15% and I did not see a Muslim area where voters' turnout was more than, or even close to, 45% (only in Mazra`ah; in other Sunni areas around 30%) (all official and final results will be released tomorrow but they are not likely to be different). It is clear that many voters were turned off by the non-democratic nature of this "election." This only tells you that "free" elections (and this one was "free") do not constitute a democracy. How could you be eager to vote when half of the candidates have won their seats already? And Hariri's campaign rhetoric turned off many people in Beirut, especially when it was obvious that Sa`d was shamelessly exploiting the blood of his father to rally supporters and voters. It got worse in the last several days when Hariri said, actually said NOT even implied, that those who run against Hariri candidates are the killers of his father. I am not making this up. By the way, do you know the US ambassador in Lebanon went to a polling station to observe today? Even the correspondent of the pro-US Al-Arabiyya TV, the fine reporter Maya Baydun (previously of AlJazeera), had to go up to the US ambassador to ask him about what he was doing there. Imagine if the Lebanese ambassador in DC goes to polling stations on election day in the US. He would probably be sent back home, or maybe to Guantanamo. Also, the Hariri, INC , fearing embarrassment, insisted that their Sunni supporters vote for the entire list (we do not have closed lists in Lebanon; so voters can select some members of one list and others form another list). Yet, the Sunni voters did not abide by the instructions, as we can see from the results. In the first electoral district of Beirut, for example, Sa`d Hariri received 39,500 votes while Jubran Tuwayni (on his list) received 30,591 votes. That is many thousands of Sunni voters who did not vote for Tuwayni, and who did not vote for the entire list "as is" as Hariri kept saying during his campaign. Of course, Jubran Tuwayni is highly unpopular among Muslims and leftists for his past associations with right-wing Maronite-oriented militias and for his current right-wing sectarian Christian views and expressions, especially as he recently compared Shi`ites to sheep. In the 2nd electoral district of Beirut, there also were surprises. The largest number of votes in that list went to Hizbullah's candidate, Amin Shirri, who refused to show up in the official photograph of the list on the first day of its announcement (he said he was "flossing" when asked about his absence). The Shi`ite Shirri received 31,809 votes while the Sunni Walid `Idu received 25,123. Many Shi`ites clearly did not vote for the entire list especially when you see how well Greek Orthodox candidate, the consistently (and unrecoveringly) radical Nasserist advocate, Najah Wakim, received some 10,000 votes (almost half of the votes of the winning candidate `Atif Majdalani (Wakim is keen every year when he sees me to tell me whether I have gained or lost weight from the previous year--Lebanese love to do that for some reason). Those results don't bode well for the future of the Hariri political Inc. Hariri did what his father would not have done--the alliance with Saulange Gemayyel will come back to haunt him in particular. Also, his father was very keen on showing sensitivity to Armenian concerns. Furthermore, Hariri was politically skillful, unlike his son, and he had a style, also unlike his son. The absence of Baha' Hariri (the eldest son of Rafiq) on this election day will only fuel the rumors about a feud between the two brothers following the selection of Sa`d over Baha' as Rafiq's heir. Of course, with money, in a poor country like Lebanon, you can buy many voters. Think about it. Hariri can easily afford to pay at least $1000 for each of his 39,000 voters. But there will be limits to what he can do, especially as he harbors higher office ambitions (see post below, NOW).