- 08:30
Since its independence, Lebanon has served as a mirror reflecting the events unfolding in its much larger neighboring country. Damascus has long cast a covetous eye on Lebanon, disturbed by its freedoms and economic achievements. Despite all the challenges, Lebanon has managed to preserve a semblance of political democracy, even in its darkest hours. Meanwhile, in Damascus, coups d'état followed one another relentlessly, until the Assad dynasty rose to power, embracing socialism—a path that ultimately ruined the country and drove away vital investments.
For five decades, Lebanon was reduced to little more than a political, economic, and military pawn, manipulated by a regime that mutated into a mafia-like structure. Every means was used to keep the "little brother" subjugated: occupation, large-scale extortion, assassinations, wars, smuggling — nothing was off-limits. Lebanon’s political class, largely complicit, bowed to the masters in Damascus. Then, abruptly, the tide turned. The Assad regime collapsed in what might be called a reverse Berezina. Few will mourn its bloody reign. But a question lingers: can Mr. Al Sharaa forge the Syria he envisions—a democratic, liberal, tolerant, and peaceful state?
“Once bitten, twice shy”—many remain cautious, and understandably so. There is no reason to doubt the intentions of the new strongman of Damascus. Yet behind him, an Islamist international of sorts looms, drawing together thousands of militiamen from all corners of the Muslim world. Will they heed orders from above? That’s not the greatest threat, though. The stakes are so high that they seem almost unbeatable. The biggest danger now is the potential fragmentation of the country. In the northeast, the Kurds are clinging to their autonomy, backed by the Americans. De facto, they are far removed from a unified central state. To the north, the entire border region with Turkey looks set to remain under Turkish military control.
The coastal region, predominantly Alawite, could end up as a Russian-controlled enclave, with Russia’s historical bases there and Washington’s tacit approval. To the south, Israeli influence would lead to a Druze-Sunni demilitarized zone, with no military presence from Damascus. The center, home to a Sunni majority, would serve as a buffer against any return of an Iranian axis pushing toward the Mediterranean and Lebanon. Syria’s Christians, or their remnants, lack a viable foothold and risk being overlooked in any potential partition, politely labelled as a federation. For now, such a scenario is dismissed by both the Syrian state and by Arab and Western countries. But in this region, nothing is ever truly impossible.
Regardless of the outcome, Lebanon will inevitably feel the effects of Syria's shifting geopolitical landscape. An empowered central state that respects its neighbors would be the ideal outcome. A fragmented federation, on the other hand, would only destabilize Lebanon’s delicate balance, which it certainly doesn't need. The waiting drags on, and the two million Syrian refugees in Lebanon show no eagerness to return home. In fact, new pro-Assad refugees have joined their ranks, already numbering around 80,000.
Napoleon Bonaparte famously said, “The policy of a state is in its geography.”
From this perspective, one could argue that we’re well served.
Comments