The fall of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad was seen in Lebanon with enormous relief, since the country paid a very heavy price from the Syrian invasion in 1976 until the Syrian withdrawal in 2005. And even after, because this regime has continued to assassinate Lebanese politicians, intellectuals and journalists. But this enormous relief is mixed with a certain worry. There are risks of destabilization, underlines Karim Émile Bitar, researcher associated with Iris and specialist in the Middle East.
5 mins
RFI: How is the fall of Bashar al-Assad perceived in Lebanon?
Karim Émile Bitar: The fall of the Syrian regime was seen with enormous relief in Lebanon since this country paid an extremely heavy price from the Syrian invasion in 1976 until the Syrian withdrawal in 2005 and even after, because this regime continued to assassinate Lebanese politicians, intellectuals, journalists. But this enormous relief is mixed with a certain worry, because today there is a real risk to the unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Syria. And the Lebanese are aware that a destabilization of Syria, if there were to be Turkish, Israeli or other regional powers’ appetites, could once again have repercussions on Lebanon and also destabilize Lebanon. The destinies of these two countries are inextricably linked, for better and for worse.
What would this destabilization of Lebanon consist of in the face of the Syrian situation?
Before the fall of the Syrian regime, Lebanon hosted nearly two million refugees. Pro rata, it was the country in the world that hosted the largest number of refugees in relation to its population. Some of these refugees, around 350,000 according to the UN, returned home, either before or just after the fall of the regime. But it is already beginning to say – even if we do not have precise figures – that there are supporters of the Syrian regime who, in turn, are finding refuge in Lebanon. So it goes both ways.
Also readLebanon: the crossover of Syrian refugees after the fall of the Bashar el-Assad regime
Furthermore, the borders between Lebanon and Syria are still extremely porous. They have always been extremely porous throughout history. The fall of the Syrian regime cuts off Hezbollah’s supply channels. Iran can no longer revive Hezbollah. But sea lanes and some other channels are still open.
There is also the risk that the factions which have made fall Bashar al-Assad are not quite aligned and end up engaging in fratricidal fighting. And religious minorities may also have certain anxieties, notably the Alawites, who fear reprisals from the new leaders in Damascus. There is also an Alawite community in Lebanon. There is a part of the Lebanese political class that was aligned with Syria. So this could end up leading to further destabilization of Lebanon.
With the victory of the HTS in Syria, the Sunnis are in the lead. There are 90% Sunnis in Syria. What consequences could this have for Lebanon?
This will also upset the balance of power inside Lebanon, where the Sunni community could feel like it is once again on the rise after having felt somewhat marginalized since Saad Hariri’s withdrawal from political life. Christian communities are overwhelmingly hostile to the Syrian regime, but at the same time, they fear that Islamist tendencies will prevail behind this makeover of Mr. Joulani. Behind this rebranding, there could be a new Islamist breakthrough, as some of its supporters may not be aligned with its new vision, which is intended to be inclusive.
If we look at the history of relations between Syria and Lebanon, there have always been attempts to dominate Lebanon by Syria. This was true until now. Can Lebanon fear the new Syrian authorities, a relationship of domination and very constrained sovereignty?
It is true that Syria has never truly recognized the full sovereignty of Lebanon. Whatever the Syrian regimes that have succeeded one another, and more precisely the Baath Party regime since 1963, they have always considered that Lebanon had artificial borders, that it was after all only a province of Syria which had been removed by the French mandatory authorities. President Hafez el-Assad, Bashar’s father, often said that the Lebanese and Syrians form one people in two states. Implying, why don’t we form a single state? And this week, for the first time, Mr. Joulani, the head of HTSsaid he wanted there to be state-to-state relations. So he seemed to implicitly recognize Lebanese sovereignty. It remains to be seen whether once we have chased away the natural, it will not come back at a gallop and whether these new Syrian authorities will not very quickly have new inclinations to interfere on the Lebanese domestic scene.
The constraint of Lebanese sovereignty by Syria was also within the framework of the axis of resistance, that is to say Iran with its allies. This axis of resistance is not destroyed, but extremely diminished. And in this case, what could be for Lebanon?
We are undoubtedly witnessing a paradigmatic change such as we have not experienced for thirty or forty years, because we have witnessed in quick succession a considerable weakening of Hezbollah which has lost more than 70% of its military capabilities, according to analysts, and to the fall of the Syrian regime which had exercised almost uncontested power over Lebanon for decades. So, these two factors will undoubtedly shake up the situation in Lebanon. It remains to be seen whether the Lebanese will not, once again, miss an opportunity to start from scratch on new, much more solid foundations, and to finally build a sovereign state.
Also readThe risk of fragmentation hangs over post-Assad Syria