News of the resignation of the Minister of Energy and Water, Joe Al-Saddi, came out of the political scenes to the forefront, after the head of the Change Movement, lawyer Elie Mahfoud – who is politically close to the “Lebanese Forces” party – acknowledged that the option of resignation is now firmly on the table, and is subject to serious consideration.
Mahfouz’s position has precise dimensions in its timing and content, as it is considered a possible political prelude to Al-Saddi’s exit from the government, against the backdrop of the minister’s failure to achieve the promised breakthrough in the energy sector, and his performance remaining below the level of official and popular expectations that accompanied his assumption of the portfolio.
In his post on the “X” platform, Mahfoud stressed that the discussion of Al-Saddi’s resignation goes beyond the framework of rumors or media analyses, which officially moves the discussion from the stage of denial to approaching the reasons for the departure and its expected repercussions.
Despite his reference to the possibility of resignation, Mahfoud sought to relieve the minister of direct responsibility, referring it to the heavy legacy of the ministry, and wondering about the justifications for not subjecting the energy file from day one to the audit of a global and independent company that examines all accounts, contracts, and obligations.
Mahfoud believed that the origin of the crisis does not lie in the performance of a minister in charge of a sector burdened with accumulations, but rather in a “system” that prevented the full facts from being revealed. He reiterated his demand for an independent international audit, opening all files, and accurately defining responsibilities in preparation for facing accountability.
However, attempts to justify the performance of the echo did not eliminate its more prominent political significance; The filing of the resignation file publicly by a figure close to the “Lebanese Forces” reflects that the option of leaving the ministry has become a possibility, and that the process of paving the way for it has actually begun.
In the face of this reality, the “Lebanese Forces” find themselves facing a delicate political impasse. Either it continues to provide cover for its minister and bear the burdens of his performance, or it chooses to remove him from the government under the slogan that the defect lies in the structure of the ministry and its historical accumulations, not in the person of the minister.
