On Berri And Aoun

If the Shiaas chose their man, why can’t the Maronites?


I’ve been thinking about this and I wanted to know what you think. Everytime Aoun supporters or other pundits explain why he should be President, they use the following logic: Since the Shiaas chose Nabih Berri for Speaker, despite the objection of the rest of the Lebanese, why can’t the Maronites chose their own guy?

But if one makes an equivalence, isn’t Nabih Berri’s AMAL movement in the Shiaa camp the equivalent of the Qornet Shahwan movement in the Maronite one?
The Shias could have insisted on a Hezbollah guy for the Speaker’s position, but they instead opted for a man who belongs to a party that is more “moderate” (more acceptable to others) but less popular among the Shiaas themselves.

If that logic applies to the Christians, then it’s a Qornet person (or a LFer) that should be president, not Michel Aoun.