I would like to thank Dan for your invitation and congratulate you on the efforts you spend to excel with international negotiation program.

I am delighted to be here today, to talk to you about centrism, a topic which might be familiar to you, but which needs to be promoted in my part of the world as probably the only way to bring people to a common ground.Because ,in our region, the issues are not debated between left and right, liberal or conservative; unfortunately they have been taking  the shape of religious affiliations. And I believe that tolerance and moderate policies through centrist governments are the answer to federate all factions around one state.

Definition of Centrism

Centrism is a balanced political positioning, based on the practice of promoting moderate policies, which shy away from various political extremes.

In other words, centrism is neither left nor right; it is a third way approach that offers the chance to move beyond the old clash of left and right, towards a progressive and newpolitical philosophy.

Ideological Failure of the “Right” & “Left”

A key reason for the failure of major parties to adopt a broad diverse ideology, is probably because of their inability to blend certain liberal and conservative principles, or issue positions forming a more evolved and more adapted way of thinking. .

Because none of the major parties have had much success at combining the ideologies of liberalism and conservatism, they have been consistently unable to endorse a liberal stand on some issues, and a conservative stand on other issues, without running the risk of appearing unreliable.

Similarly, they have been unable to propose "federating policy alternatives" without threatening their support base, which tends to be organized along very stiff ideological lines. For this reason, both of the major factions have become ideologically constrained, polarized, and sometimes deceiving in their public policy choices.

Why Centrism?

When tackling the issue of centrism in politics, a common denominator emerges that a ‘centrist’ does not follow specific party lines. To me, a centrist is someone who believes in practical solutions that are more constructive than moral victories, and more uniting than partisan conflicts.

Usually, it is easier to define what a centrist is not, than what it is. A centrist is someone who is fundamentally free in spirit, and who refuses to be passive, facing rigid views. A centrist is neither a populist –who pleases all crowds- nor an elitist –who addresses a few.A centrist is one who represents a silent, under-represented majority, using common sense not common causes, as a rallying point.

A centrist is someone who does not bend both ends towards the center to attain a median outcome, but rather works on minimizing the distances in-between, by creating an equilibrium, by increasing the footprint of common ground, and reaching out to all citizens, hence taking into consideration the wellbeing of the nation as a whole.

A centrist is not someone who would say no to the left and no to the right, but rather says yes and yes to ideas that would improve the rapprochement between various social, religious and political tendencies, taking into account the broader national interest and not focusing on a biased view.

The Pillars of Centrism

For me, the three major pillars of Centrism are:

• Inclusiveness, driven by the willingness to federate the largest number of people, with different affiliations and background;

• Tolerance, represented by the willingness to accept the particularities of each individual regardless of his or her race, gender, political or religious belief;

• and Pragmatism, where solutions must not bend to special interest agendas, or to extremist positions and narrow vision, but rather have realistic and achievable answers to the various problems facing our societies.

The case of Lebanon

I want to move this theme closer to home, to Lebanon, and share few models of the centrist experience, which invariably has been associated  during the last century,with the most stable, prosperous and productive years of our country,

We are a nation-State almost the size of Connecticut wwith 18 ethnic and religious groups. We are probably the oldest and most tolernt multi-cultural society. This pluralism is somewhat unique and –by the same token- complex, because in a country such as Lebanon, the notion of accepting –not necessarily adopting- other people’s views, is by itself a balancing act. This is why, in such a pluralistic environment, , a struggling democracy and extreme views on the rise in the region, centrism becomes a much-needed strategy. In fact, it should probably become the official policy of the State in all domestic political matters.

Historical Relevance of Centrism in Lebanon

Let us turn to Lebanon few centrists’, but worthy experiences, and attempt a summary analysis. I have selected some periods of Lebanon from 1943, date of the Independence to the present day. Any in between periods which I will not mention could be considered as periods of unrest and extreme polarization.

1943-1950s-which I call :The Founders of Independence Era

• Bechara El Khoury and Riyad El Solh are considered the founding fathers of modern Lebanon. They defied their respective communities (Christians and Muslims) to build a nation that united us all. They forged the idea that together would be better than separate.

• In essence, they argued for the principle of one nation but with a plural system that respected the rights and freedoms of all religious groups. They were able to bridge the gap between Muslims who supported unity with Syria and Christians who supported a smaller Christian oriented Lebanon. That period of calm and stability lasted from the early 1940s till the mid fifties . In Lebanese time, this equates to a century.

1958-1964-The Fouad Chehab Era

• President Fouad Chehab was elected President in 1958 after Lebanon was torn between partisans of the Pan-Arab Plan championed by Nasser in Egypt, and those aligned with the pro-Western camp that included Iraq, Turkey, and Jordan;and history seems to be repeating itself to a certain extent.

• Then general Chehab, who was the commander in chief of the army, revealed his centrist colors by refusing to use lethal force against the insurgents;

• Once elected President, he initiated and led a dual policy of cooperation with Pan-Arabists on regional issues of security. He also led a firm resistance to any interference by Lebanon’s neighbors into internal politics. Too small to defy a wave of Pan-Arabism and eager to preserve at any cost the unity of the country, this centrist policy gave an era of stability.

First two years of Salim Hoss

• PM Selim El Hoss was a moderate politician, a centrist by nature, and a Statesman par excellence. He is remembered as a great crisis manager, who despite the civil war he appointed a government of technocrats with ministers representing all quarreling factions who managed to balance between lawlessness in parts of the country and the need to reassert the role of the State.

Post Civil War-The Rafic Hariri Era

• Other examples of centrist attempts include the first government of late PM Rafic Hariri formed in 1992.

• After a devastating phase of the civil war, and following a constitution amendment (the so-called Taif Accord), late Prime Minister Rafik Hariri

formed an all-inclusive cabinet, and started a mega reconstruction program. By forging common economic interests he narrowed the divide between all factions and emphasized the role of a friendly government, promoting  the role of the private sector.

2005-My First Assignment as a Prime Minister

In April 2005  I was nominated by an overwhelming majority of MPs to lead a government in the aftermath of the assassination of PM Hariri. It was a dark moment in the history of our nation and we were at a crossroad between relative stability and the assured descent into the abyss. I had formed my first government by appointing technocrats representing all factions in order to avoid political bickering in the cabinet,and to emphasize the focus on practical management of governmental affairs. I abstained from running for parliament, a first for a sitting Prime Minister, in order to avoid conflicts of interest. Finally, our government organized the subsequent elections with the results reflecting, as never before, the true choice of the electorate body.

2011-2014 My Second Premiership Term

Fast forward to 2011, the Lebanese Parliament, for a second time, nominated me at majority, as Prime Minister. At such time and as it continues to be, Lebanon was torn between those in support of Iranian policies in the Middle East and those of Saudi Arabia’s. Similar to all previous crises, Lebanon was yet again witnessing a regional conflict of disturbing proportions that polarized politicians who saw in such conflicts an opportunity to further their local agendas.

One would think that I ticked all the boxes for a smooth mandate.

However to make things more challenging, the Arab Spring started in many countries and specially Syria, the country that borders Lebanon. As a centrist, and during my term in office, I decided to shy away Lebanon from what is going on in the Arab world, particularly in Syria, and was successful in introducing the dis-association policy, which was initially criticized by the two political blocs in Lebanon,but was eventually adopted as a national policy by all political parties and continues to be the Country’s official policy. In retrospect the very centrist   dis-association policy safeguarded Lebanon from a new civil war.

My second premiership term was definitely a tough era; I solicited the worst reactions from all factions. In the local political context, I had no party affiliation, no religion biases, and no allegiance to a foreign nation. I became a political outcast... or worst: a centrist. But it was this conviction that pushed me to resign, when I realized that an alternation in power is the proper democratic realization of what I always defended and believed in.

“How dare you be a centrist in the Middle East?” should be a good title for a play.

Although I am not sure whether it would be labeled a tragedy, a comedy or a thriller with a happy ending, we will let the global audience decide.

I have asserted my State duties –not my privileges- at those asking me to bend things their way.

I have argued diversity of thought to those accusing me of listening to the other side.

I have called and fostered dialogue when political discourse was nil. When the entire Arab world was on fire, I have worked hard to maintain peace and order between rival factions.

I have managed a government with an unsatisfied majority and stood accountable before a prejudiced minority.

I have defended integrity in politics and tried to promote meritocracy.

I have fulfilled Lebanon’s International commitments

I have championed the cause of none and asserted our collective duty to the nation.

Practically, what did I learn by being in such an uncomfortable situation at such critical time?

Here are my 5 tips for centrists:

1. Do not take one view, take two, even more but form your own and state it loud and clear.

2. Find like-minded people on both extremes, they are out there. Seek them.

3. Foster dialogue between archenemies even if indirectly. Everyone wants to be heard.

4. Communicate even at the expense of your vocal chords.

5. Never compromise on your principles even if you constitute a majority of one.

So If I go back to the title of our discussion on whether centrism in Middle East politics is a myth or method? I simply say that Centrism is a myth for those attached to their rigid extreme views but is definitely a third way approach to those thriving for solutions taking into consideration civic peace, stability and prosperity. So I’ll rephrase the title by saying that: Centrism in Middle East Politics is not a myth but a necessity.!!

In conclusion, my dear friends, I will end with what one of the promoters of centrism once said: sometimes we go right, sometimes we go left, but in the end the best policies lie in the middle.

I thank you for your time.