Kataeb MP Nadim Gemayel defended the broad coalition backing the “Beirut Unites Us” list running for the municipal elections in Beirut, rejecting claims that it represents any one political faction and stressing the importance of safeguarding parity and civic harmony in the Lebanese capital.

In remarks addressing growing debate ahead of the anticipated municipal elections, Gemayel described the list as a non-partisan alliance led by prominent community member Ibrahim Zeidan, and formed through coordination among various political and social actors, including Christian parties, MP Fouad Makhzoumi, the Progressive Socialist Party, and others.

“This is not a list backed by one party,” Gemayel said. “It was born out of efforts to build the broadest possible alliance capable of upholding parity and ensuring balanced representation across Beirut’s diverse social fabric.”

He said the “Beirut Unites Us” slate brings together political parties, influential local families, and civic figures, and “deserves a fair chance” in the polls. While acknowledging that the list received support from the Shiite Amal-Hezbollah duo, Gemayel stressed that none of the Shiite candidates are affiliated with those two parties.

“These candidates are simply individuals who are acceptable to the Shiite duo, just as they are to many others, including some actors not even represented on the list,” he said.

Gemayel pushed back against claims that Makhzoumi’s support was tied to making Zeidan mayor of Beirut, saying the alliance and the candidacy emerged after weeks of dialogue.

“Preparations for the municipal elections began three or four months ago,” he said. “We were in constant contact with the Future Movement, which initially expressed its intention to participate and help preserve parity. But after former Prime Minister Saad Hariri withdrew from political life, the Future Movement also stepped back.”

He noted that in previous municipal elections, the Future Movement had taken the lead in forming the electoral list and naming its head. In the absence of that role this year, Gemayel said it was natural for Makhzoumi, one of the main Sunni actors currently active in Beirut’s political scene, to propose a candidate.

“He suggested Ibrahim Zeidan, vice president of the Dialogue Party and his relative, to head the list. We trust this choice,” he said. “And we trust the entire list.”

While conceding the list may not be perfect, Gemayel insisted it was the best option under current circumstances and a necessary step to avoid dangerous sectarian tensions amid regional instability.

“Our main concern is to avoid any Christian-Sunni clash,” he said. “Our objective is to safeguard parity and constitutional legitimacy, and protect Beirut’s identity.”

Gemayel emphasized that “parity” should not be interpreted narrowly in terms of numbers or religious quotas.

“Parity means maintaining the spirit of Beirut,” he said. “The capital must remain a shared space for all Lebanese. That was our primary motivation.”

He said the idea of closed electoral lists—lists that cannot be altered by voters—had been proposed in Parliament to help preserve this parity.

“Today, there are no guarantees for parity. That’s why we pursued two parallel approaches: forming the widest possible electoral alliance and attempting legislative reform.”

“This was a way to protect the legacy of Rafik Hariri, who always sought to uphold balance and prevent sectarian vote-counting,” he said. “It was also a practical way to enable each community to vote for a coherent list with a program, while ensuring representation for all.”

The proposal was rejected in Parliament and sparked heated sectarian rhetoric.

“That’s unfortunate,” Gemayel said. “It framed the municipal elections in a sectarian light, which we had sought to avoid.”

Gemayel acknowledged concerns over the broad powers held by Beirut’s governor—a government appointee who oversees municipal operations and is not elected by residents. He said these powers are problematic for all citizens, not only Christians.

He pointed out to the fact that the governor is not accountable to any local constituency, and essentially controls the municipality for six years.

“Even Muslims have an interest in reforming the governor’s authority,” he said. “We can’t solve the issue by pitting representation against governance. This needs rational, objective dialogue. Our legal framework is outdated and must be modernized.”

“This setup is detrimental to Christians even more than to Muslims,” he said. “Still, this doesn’t mean we should pit representation against governance. We need calm, rational dialogue to address these concerns objectively and outside of sectarian frameworks. All of us have a vested interest in modernizing outdated laws.”

Gemayel drew a comparison with Paris, which revised its governance system in the 1980s, moving away from heavy central government control in favor of stronger local authority.

“We need a similar approach,” he said. “Let’s work seriously on reform without sectarianism or grandstanding. We must put the citizen’s interest at the heart of the conversation.”

He cautioned against viewing the issue in simplistic communal terms.

“Some fear weakening the governor—a Christian—would strengthen a Muslim mayor. But we need to look at the big picture. Beirut faces structural challenges. The solution lies in a broader governance vision.”

Gemayel said the goal now is to hold successful, representative elections that preserve parity.

“Our immediate goal is to conduct successful municipal elections that safeguard parity and constitutional legitimacy. After that, we promise all Beirut residents that we will work seriously on this file, away from posturing, sectarianism, or regional favoritism. We need to put all concerns on the table and address them with the citizen’s interest as our guiding principle.”

Gemayel noted there are four serious electoral lists in Beirut, all of which take parity into account.

“That tells us there’s a broad consensus on this issue,” he said. “The goal now is to ensure parity through voting outcomes."

“I urge voters to vote for a full list, not to cross out names,” he said. “All the lists have flaws, but each voter should assess their priorities and act accordingly.”

He also addressed criticism from rival groups, including the “Beirut Madinati” list backed by civil society.

“There’s nothing wrong with competition,” he said. “We reached out to several opposition actors and expressed our willingness to coordinate, but we received no response.”

Gemayel said Beirut’s history of coexistence should not be jeopardized for short-term political wins.

“Our elderly mukhtars are trusted figures. They’ve been key to preserving social cohesion. We want to integrate youth and party representatives too—but without destroying the fabric that holds the city together.”

He warned of the risk of dismantling parity in the upcoming vote and the precedent it could set.

“Some think that after breaking parity, they can later renegotiate and compensate. Christians have faced many setbacks and hoped to compensate later, but that never materialized. Look at the Taif Agreement, the public sector appointments. We’ve always been promised compensation that never came,” he said. “If we want to claim our rights later, we must start by understanding that you must give in order to claim."

Gemayel ended his remarks with a direct appeal to Beirut’s Muslim community: “There are those who want to score points or break parity just to target one group. That’s dangerous. We must rise to the level of Rafik Hariri’s legacy, which put Beirut and Lebanon first. Otherwise, amid today’s regional chaos, we risk triggering an explosion that benefits no one.”

He concluded by urging all citizens to vote, regardless of their political affiliations.

“Even if you disagree with our list, go vote,” he said. “Exercise your democratic right. Voting is the only way to protect Beirut’s future.”