Beirut, Damascus and the Challenge of a Normal Country

Asharq Al-Awsat

6 hours ago

The Lebanese people complain about the advice from ambassadors and dictates from international financial organizations. They believe that the outside was paving their road and goals and setting the means for them. They are annoyed that their country is being treated like a minor, who the world has no faith in his ability to get himself out of the abyss. The abundance of doctors and treatments often deepens the patient's confusion.
There can be no arguing that the Lebanese people, similar to other peoples, have the right to address their present and shape their future. However, recalling givens is not enough to retrieve this right. Hegemonies begin when countries start to break apart under the weight of divisions and interventions. The Lebanese divisions are old and so are the interventions.
The most dangerous thing that can happen to a country is the loss of the ability to take a decision. This lack of this ability depletes what remains of the fortification that should be available to a sovereign and independent nation. The problem is compounded when the country is surrounded by wars and conflicts that are beyond its ability to join or distance itself from them. And so, the country becomes captive on the inside and before the outside world.
The truth is that the Lebanese patient has suddenly found himself floundering in a cycle of wars that erupted after the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. Then it found itself confronted with the difficult endings of these wars, which were contrary to the goals of the ones who launched the Aqsa Flood and 'support front'.
The people of the region didn't need new experiences to become acquainted with Israel's hostility and savagery of its army. But what has happened has given the Israeli killing machine the opportunity to go to the extreme in its destruction and killing even going to so far as to commit genocide. Observers of Israel's behavior in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon sense that the balance of power has broken and is now tipped heavily to the Israeli side.
There is no need to remind the reader of the blood being shed at the aid distribution points in Gaza; no need to explain the meaning of the Israeli army warning to residents of Beirut's southern suburbs to evacuate specific buildings before striking. The daily assassinations carried out by Israeli drones in Lebanon hold clear messages and so does the continued destruction of the remaining capabilities of the former Syrian army.
The people of the region don't need someone to explain to them the significance of the collapse of the former Syrian regime. The end of the Assad regime changed features and roles in the region. The collapse broke the chain of the so-called 'Axis of Resistance' that started in Tehran and ended in Beirut, passing through Baghdad and Damascus. This is a massive change that confronted officials with very difficult choices.
Ahmed al-Sharaa entered the Syrian presidential palace and was confronted with dangerous new facts. A country broken and without an army and state institutions. A country drowning in fear and poverty where millions live in refugee camps near the border. Sharaa had to choose and take decisions. The era of factions means endless wars, the fragmentation of Syria and more blood and death. Sharaa had to convince the Syrians and the world. There needed to be a moment for Syria to catch its breath, regroup and bring in aid.
Sharaa surprised the Syrians, the region and world. His choice was Syria first and foremost. He has no desire to surrender to old formulas, unyielding beliefs and outdated treatments. He decided to understand the balance of power in the region and world and deal with it. The obsession of saving Syria and reclaiming it from militias and hegemonies took precedence.
Sharaa sent a frank message that the new Syria wants to be a normal country. One where the state monopolizes control over decisions of war and peace and the possession of arms. This is not an easy task at all. The establishment of a normal state demands respecting local and international laws and ensuring equality between segments of society. It means abandoning the rhetoric of eliminating the other and changing features.
The emergence of such Syrian determination encouraged countries eager to help Syria. Sharaa said the new Syria does not want to pose a threat to any of its neighbors. This desire to quit the military aspect of the conflict with Israel paved the way for handshakes and recognitions.
Despite the difficulties, there is a sense that Sharaa's journey has kicked off with regional and international support. This took place at the same time as the Lebanese people were dreaming that their country could also kick off the journey of returning towards the normal state. This dream was reawakened with the election of Jospeh Aoun as president and appointment of Nawaf Salam as prime minister. The Lebanese people were hopeful in the president's swearing in speech and the government's policy statement.
Months have since passed, and the Lebanese journey has not yet sailed. The conditions that led to Sharaa's arrival to power differ than those that led to Aoun and Salam's arrival. Lebanon's composition is very complicated and uniting the people is not easy. It is evident that Hezbollah's reading of what is taking place in the region is different than the readings of other Lebanese segments and those of Aoun and Salam.
The world is demanding that Lebanon return to becoming a normal country that can be trusted, helped and supported. Aoun and Salam cannot do this mission alone. The responsibility equally also lies on Speaker Nabih Berri given his standing in the Shiite community and in the country. The return to the normal state cannot take place without Hezbollah reading how the war ended and what is taking place in Syria. Keeping Lebanon hanging in the Iranian and non-Iranian balances will leave it at risk of wasting the international support to help it.
The world set a condition for the new Syria to agree to become a normal country, and it did. Lebanon's lack of serious collective decision to move towards such a goal will leave it vulnerable to many surprises.