Independence Movement leader Michel Moawad is the son of slain President Rene Moawad who was elected after the Taef Agreement was reached in 1989. Moawad was  assassinated days after assuming the presidency in a bomb attack that targeted his convoy in Beirut. His wife, former Social Affairs Minister Nayla Moawad followed in his footsteps and became a prominent member of the March 14 Movement. Her son Michel Moawad later founded the Independence Movement, an independent political party within the March 14 coalition. In an interview with Al Jazeera, Moawad, however, concedes that the March 14 coalition has failed on several occasions to rise to the expectations of the Lebanese. He also casts doubts over the success of National Dialogue in breaking the presidential impasse and accuses Hezbollah of implementing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s agenda in Lebanon. The Saudi-led operation Storm of Resolve, he adds, has restored the missing power balance in the region.

Here follows the full text of his interview with Al Jazeera.

Q: Do you believe that National Dialogue will help resolve the presidential impasse and the numerous crises in Lebanon?

No one should oppose dialogue in principle. However, National Dialogue talks resemble to a great extent the Cabinet meetings. The same parties that are represented in the Cabinet are participating in National Dialogue with the exception of the Lebanese Forces that have boycotted both. Thus, just like the paralyzed Cabinet has failed to deal with the garbage crisis–because its primary goal is to provide political cover for Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria on the one hand and divide the pie among political parties on the other– national dialogue will also fail. We also ought to remember that previous dialogue rounds since 2006 including the Baabda Declaration have failed because Hezbollah is unwilling to commit to any of the resolutions he previously endorsed.

Q: Are National Dialogue talks the result of street protests which started as a popular movement to demand a solution to the trash crisis and grown into a movement calling for the abolition of the current political system? Or are talks the result of  a rapprochement between regional powers urging the Lebanese to engage in dialogue?

I don’t believe that National Dialogue is directly related to street protests though the popular movement has put pressure on both the March 14 and March 8 camps to deal with the trash crisis, which was being discussed at some point.  It is more likely that Speaker Nabih Berri interpreted certain international stances as a positive sign but the outcome of the first round of talks might lead him to reconsider his stance amid signs of further regional and international complications. Thus, the call for dialogue might have been premature.

Q: What about the protest movement ? Where did it succeed and fail? And do you believe the government will meet the demands of protesters?

The protest movement has rightful demands. Lebanon is going through one the worst ever trash crisis. A crisis, which i warned back in June, Lebanon will be facing when the Neemeh landfill is shut down on July 17 as previously announced.  Thus, the protest movement is a natural reaction to the government’s failure to deal with simple issues and protesters are right to demand a solution to the thrash crisis, the resignation of the environment minister and the election of a president. However, protesters should not be lured into either demanding the resignation of the government because it will lead to vacuum in state institutions or the abolition of the political system because it will drag Lebanon into Chaos. The vandalism and organized riots, which we have witnessed in Beirut, are clear indications that some parties were attempting to hijack the protest movement to achieve certain goals.

Q: Some officials including Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi expect the election of a president in three to five months? Do you share their point of view? And what is preventing the election of a president today?

I disagree with Minister Rifi though I wish from the bottom of my heart the election of a president because only then can we protect Lebanon and revive state institutions. What is obstructing the election of a president is simply the insistence of Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement to boycott parliament session as dictated by Iran so far.

Q: General Michel Aoun is calling for the amendment of the constitution to allow for the president’s election through national popular vote. Do you share his point of view or not? And why?

In principle, the election of a president through national popular vote is a rightful demand. However, under the current circumstances, it is aimed at obstructing the presidential election since we live under a parliamentary rather than a presidential system of government. Thus, the election of a president through popular vote requires the amendment of presidential powers and therefore a revamp of our political system which, under the current circumstances, is unfeasible. For instance,  we are currently unable to solve the garbage crisis, so how do you expect us to make constitutional amendments? Constitutional amendments should not be discussed during times of political turmoil. Otherwise, we will be confronting some sort of a coup.

Q: Some believe that the March 14 Movement made a mistake when it abandoned the “popular movement”? do you agree?

The March 14 Movement made numerous mistakes. The biggest mistake was to fight for independence without fighting against corruption. However, it is important to note that you cannot fight corruption in the presence of mini-states that are not subject to the authority of the state. Disagreements within the March 14 coalitions in this regard, in addition to a series of compromises, have undermine the coalition’s success.

Q: Do you think that a domestic agreement involves necessarily an Iranian-Saudi agreement?

Lebanon is not an isolated island and is part of this region. Thus, as a relatively small country,  it is normal that we are influenced by regional power dynamics. We also ought to remember that Hezbollah is an integral part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and is committed to implementing Iran’s agenda in Lebanon. The fact that Hezbollah’s decision-making mechansim lies in Iran is provoking its domestic foes to seek support from Iran’s regional foes as a way to preserve the polticial equilibrium in Lebanon. Therefore, I expect no change in the political status quo before a Saudi-Iranian agreement is reached or the outcome of the Saudi-Iranian confrontation materializes. The Saudi-Iranian confrontation in light of the Saudi-led operation Storm of Resolve demonstrates that Iran will not be allowed to violate the sovereignty of the Arab world and spread its influence across four Arab countries into the shores of the Mediterranean.

Q: How would you describe the Arab intervention under Saudi leadership to curb Iran’s growing influence in the region?

Arabs have been waiting long for military intervention in Yemen but better late than never. Iran’s military involvement either directly or through its tools such as Hezbollah and the Houthi militias in a number of Arab countries including yemen, Bahrain, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon is obvious. However, the Saudi-led Operation Storm of Resolve is on track to restore the regional power balance that has been missing for decades. I also believe that the Saudi-led military intervention in Yemen has paved the way for the rise of the popular movement in Iraq in confrontation of Iranian influence and helped restore to some extent the power balance in Syria where Russia, Iran and Hezbollah are intervening to support Bashar Assad’s regime. Based on all of the above, I cannot but praise the Arab military intervention in Yemen, which should be followed by a comprehensive political plan to reinstate legitimacy and sovereignty across the Arab world.