Embassy Says No U.S. Stance on Presidential Vacuum Other Than One Voiced by Hale

إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية W460

The U.S. Embassy in Beirut has denied reports circulated by some newspapers on Thursday morning regarding Washington's stance on the presidential vote in Lebanon.

An embassy source told Naharnet on Thursday afternoon that the official U.S. stance was the one expressed by U.S. Ambassador David Hale on Wednesday.

“As Lebanese parliament continues efforts to elect a president, the U.S. will continue its strong partnership with the Lebanese people, leaders and institutions,” Hale had said in a tweet.

Earlier, al-Joumhouria newspaper quoted diplomatic sources as saying that the Obama administration is planning to issue a statement that would back the Lebanese government after the presidential vacuum and call for the swift election of a new head of state.

The sources said the statement would come in support of Premier Tammam Salam's cabinet after it took over the authorities of President Michel Suleiman, who left Baabda Palace on Sunday following the expiry of his six-year term.

It would back efforts exerted to elect a president as soon as possible to limit the vacuum's timeframe, the sources said.

Lebanon's rival parties have failed to agree on a compromise president, resulting in vacuum at Baabda.

The statement is also expected to back the government in its attempt to confront the crisis of the Syrian refugees whose numbers rose to about 1.1 million, the sources said.

Hale had said Wednesday that it was “unfortunate” the polls “did not occur on time, in accordance with the Lebanese constitution.”

“As the United States has done consistently, we encourage the Lebanese parliament to elect a new president as soon as possible,” he said.

The diplomat thanked Suleiman “for his strong and wise leadership in a difficult time, and for his commitment to strong ties between our countries.”

G.K./Y.R.

M.T.

Comments 7
Default-user-icon John (Guest) 29 May 2014, 08:29

why a president is not elected by the people, similar to the US, or that is not acceptable?

Missing karim. 29 May 2014, 08:36

Time for Lebanon to finally elect a pro-Lebanon President. Enough with Suleiman and his love for Saudi Arabia. Baabda now reeks of him and his kabsa, unfortunately.

Thumb joeleb 29 May 2014, 19:26

judging by what you usually write, i'm guessing that you would consider a president who is pro-Lebanon as one who is pro-resistance and pro-syria and iran...Your binary mode of thinking is a joke, shows how brainwashed you are. You can be pro-Lebanon without being loyal to anyone else! Not to Saudi, Syria, Iran or anyone!
How about that?

Missing karim. 30 May 2014, 02:18

"You can be pro-Lebanon without being loyal to anyone else!"

That's all I want. Why cant you admit that Suleiman was pro-Saudi?

Thumb cedar 29 May 2014, 09:54

Sounds like the USA was behind it?

NO CHRISTIAN PRESIDENT = NO GOVERNMENT. we don't want the parliament to function without a president, who is the Christian representation of Lebanon per the constitution.

USA and the others, stop trying to turn Lebanon muslim.

Missing peace 29 May 2014, 13:36

talking about hezbollah, good you learned at last who is dividing lebanese to gain power! LOL

Thumb cedre 29 May 2014, 13:57

Since HizbIran doesnt threaten Israel and destroys Syria, USA doesnt mind to betray christians and give them a pro-khamenei president.
US sold Lebanon to Syria in the 80's/90's, Lebanon is to be sold now to Iran...