The battle is not only over ministerial portfolios… but over who controls decision-making in Lebanon.
Behind the scenes, talk of a broad cabinet reshuffle is intensifying, amid an increasingly clear struggle over the composition of the government, who controls sovereign and foreign-policy files, and which regional capitals have the ability to define the limits of political change.
Does Aoun want control of the Foreign Ministry?
According to what Ibrahim Al-Amin revealed in Al-Akhbar, discussions are circulating over President Joseph Aoun’s reported desire to appoint his adviser Jan Aziz as Foreign Minister, replacing Youssef Raggi.
According to the article, Aoun does not want foreign-policy decision-making to be divided among multiple centers of power, signaling an attempt to strengthen the presidency’s role in managing sensitive foreign-policy files.
Geagea seeks to change the equation
Meanwhile, the article indicates that Samir Geagea is moving toward demanding a change involving Minister Sadi, amid what the article describes as failure during his tenure at the Energy Ministry, and a push for a more effective and influential service-oriented portfolio.
Riyadh Enters the Reshuffle Battle
The most sensitive issue, however, concerns the Saudi position.
According to Al-Amin, Riyadh informed President Aoun that there is no room for changing the current governing formula, and that it is aware of his inclination to put forward Najib Mikati for the premiership. At the same time, Riyadh reportedly wants Nawaf Salam to remain in his position.
Salam… a red line?
If these reports are accurate, the debate over the cabinet reshuffle reveals something far deeper than a simple change of ministers.
The issue concerns who controls appointments, who determines the shape of government, and who has the power to draw red lines around any attempt to reshape the executive authority.
The Strategic Dimensions of the Crisis
▪️ Domestic politics under external influence: The confrontation once again highlights the extent to which government formation or reshuffling in Lebanon remains vulnerable to regional “green lights” and “vetoes,” raising questions about the autonomy of national decision-making.
▪️ Institutional paralysis: The persistence of competing conditions and counter-conditions risks pushing the country into another cycle of political deadlock or governmental paralysis, with direct consequences for Lebanon’s already severe economic and social conditions.
▪️ A message to the international community: The dispute risks reinforcing the perception among international actors and potential donors that political power-sharing remains a dominant priority in Lebanon, rather than structural reform.
At the heart of this struggle are the Foreign Ministry and the premiership, two key centers of influence in the broader battle over the distribution of political power and decision-making in Lebanon.