
Salam to Asharq Al-Awsat: Lebanese State Has Reclaimed Decisions of War and Peace
'These decisions are now being taken in Beirut, at cabinet, not anywhere else,' he told Asharq Al-Awsat in an extensive interview, the first installment of which was published on Saturday.
'No one is making dictates to us, not from Tehran or Washington,' he added.
Moreover, he underlined the right of the people to hold protests – a reference to Hezbollah supporters rallying against the government's decision to disarm the Iran-backed group and limit the possession of weapons in the country to the state.
Salam said however, that protesters should not block main roads, including the one leading to Lebanon's only functional airport in Beirut.
Asked if he believed that the Shiite ministers would resign from cabinet in wake of the decision to disarm Hezbollah, which is Shiite, he responded: 'The government is united, but that does not mean that all of its 24 ministers share the same opinion over everything.'
If consensus is not reached over an issue, then disputes and differences are resolved through a vote and other constitutional measures, he explained.
'We are not opposed to anyone turning to the streets to express their views. (...) We respect the right to have a different opinion. But we draw the line at blocking roads. It is forbidden to impede the freedom of movement of the Lebanese people, especially in heading to vital areas, such as the airport or international highway,' he said.
Salam noted that several attempts to block the airport road have been successfully thwarted by the army.
Asked if he has been advised in recent weeks to increase his personal security, the PM replied: 'I have a deep sense that the majority of the Lebanese people have confidence in our government. I am acting on this trust and my conscience is clear. I believe that any threats are being made by a small fraction of the Lebanese or some unruly people.'
US special envoy Tom Barrack speaks to the media at the Grand Serail during his visit to Beirut on July 21. (AFP)
On US special envoy Tom Barrak's upcoming highly anticipated visit to Lebanon in wake of the disarmament decision, Salam said the envoy had presented the government with a proposal, which was in turn submitted to cabinet.
'The cabinet actually received an amended version of the proposals – a 'Lebanonized' version,' the PM explained. 'Not a single patriotic Lebanese citizen can be opposed to the goals listed in the proposal that was adopted by the cabinet.'
He revealed that he along with President Joseph Aoun and parliament Speaker Nabih Berri had direct input in the final drafting of the approved goals.
'No one is opposed to the first article on ending the hostilities immediately. No one is opposed to the complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territories. No one is opposed to the return of the displaced people to their villages in the South. No one is opposed to the release of Lebanese detainees by Israel. No one is opposed to reconstruction and holding an international donor conference,' he stressed.
'Let them stop challenging the government about these issues. You are Lebanese. You have read the proposals. Tell me, what issues do you oppose? Let any Lebanese citizen tell me which articles they oppose. Does anyone oppose the international conference? Does anyone oppose the Israeli withdrawal? Does anyone oppose the return of the detainees or displaced? So why this uproar over the government decision?' he asked.
Asharq Al-Awsat countered that perhaps the uproar stems from removing Lebanon from the military conflict with Israel, to which Salam responded: 'Lebanon was supposed to be removed from this equation with the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 1701. That was around 20 years ago.'
The ceasefire agreement last November and the government's policy statement only consolidate the resolution, he stated.
'Who doesn't want to get out of the military conflict with Israel? Up until the year 2000, the resistance (Hezbollah), which I salute, was the main actor in this conflict. Before that, other groups were involved, such as the Communist Party and Communist Action Organization in Lebanon.'
'Hezbollah was the main player in making the enemy withdraw from our occupied territories in 2000. Unfortunately, after that, we spent years discussing whether to deploy the army to the South or not. Why should it even be a contentious debate to allow the army to deploy in its land in the South to protect our people?' he wondered.
The deployment was met with objections and then doubts were raised about the army, continued the PM. 'This was a wasted opportunity. The same thing happened with the decisions of war and peace. How could a decision be taken to drag Lebanon to a 'support war' (with Gaza)? This never should have happened. The state did not have a say in it,' he said.
'The decisions of war and peace have today returned to the state,' he declared. 'Only we decide when to wage a war or not. This does not mean that weapons exist outside the authority of the state. We are now concerned with how to have state monopoly over them.'
War and peace
Asharq Al-Awsat said that the state's reclaiming of the decisions of war and peace effectively means that 'Lebanon has been taken out of the (Resistance) axis that has existed for decades.'
'Yes, I know that,' replied Salam. 'They used to brag about certain issues, like saying Tehran controls four Arab capitals. I believe that that time is over. Lebanon's decisions are being taken from Beirut, at cabinet, not anywhere else. No one dictates to us what to do; not from Tehran or Washington.'
'Is that what you told (Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali) Larijani?' asked Asharq Al-Awsat.
'I issued a statement to clarify the discussions that we had. Of course, I strongly reproached him for the Iranian criticism of the Lebanese government's disarmament decision,' said the PM. 'I informed him that balanced relations between countries, especially between us and Iran, should be based on mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs.'
'We have never allowed ourselves to meddle in Iranian internal affairs. I have never stated that I support one side against the other in Iran. I do not express my opinions on Iranian affairs. I do not express my views about Iran's defense strategy or internal politics. What I am asking of Iran and any other party is to not meddle in our internal affairs.'
'Statements have been made, and unfortunately, some threatened the government. I told Larijani that this is completely unacceptable in any way, shape or form,' he stressed.
Relations with Washington
Turning to ties with Washington, Asharq Al-Awsat asked if Beirut was receiving the aspired backing from it, to which Salam replied: 'Of course not. We had hoped and want to have greater support in making the Israeli enemy withdraw completely from Lebanese territories and stop its daily violations. The United States is the side that is most capable of influencing Israel and it is not doing that enough.'
'I do not feel useless when I hear an Israeli drone flying over Lebanon. I know that today I am incapable of preventing them from flying over Lebanon, but I do not want to embark on a new military adventure. What I can do is garner enough political and diplomatic support to stop these flights and Israel's hostile acts. We have not reached that goal yet, but more contacts are needed with our Arab brothers, who are effective players on the international arena. Similar contacts are needed with the Europeans and the US,' he added.
He revealed that Barrack's proposals demand that the US and France pressure Israel to pull out of Lebanon. 'This is a positive point that I am revealing for the first time. Israel, meanwhile, has not committed to Barrack's proposals. We are,' he stressed.
PM Salam meets with Ali Larijani at the Grand Serail in Beirut on August 13. (EPA)
Moreover, Salam stated that the proposals stipulate that Israel would incur some form of penalty if it does not commit to the withdrawal. All parties involved will incur penalties for failing to meet their commitments. For Israel, the penalty would be condemnation by the Security Council, which would be a precedent. The US may actually be ready to condemn Israel for failing to respect its end of the deal.
Asked if Washington had broached the subject of holding negotiations to establish peace between Lebanon and Israel, Salam responded: 'Our position is known and clear. The Arab Peace Initiative was adopted during the Beirut summit in 2002. We have no intention of engaging in normalization negotiations or anything of the sort beyond the initiative. This is our plain and simple answer whenever the Americans or others bring up the issue.'
'There is a need, now more than ever, to implement the initiative,' he urged.
Asked about what Lebanon will demand from Barrack during his visit, Salam said he 'must guarantee that Israel cease its hostile operations and start withdrawing from Lebanese territories, especially the five points, as stipulated in his proposals.'
The PM added that Speaker Berri was involved in the discussions between him, Aoun and Barrack. 'He had reservations about some issues, but was part of the discussions at various points. Aoun, Berri and I introduced amendments to the proposals.'
Relations with Iran
'Do you fear that relations may be severed with Iran?' asked Asharq Al-Awsat.
'Iran is a big country and we boast historic relations with it. I informed Larijani that these relations existed before the establishment of the Islamic Republic. (...) We are very keen on ties between Lebanon and Iran. Iran is among the most important neighbors to the Arab world. We want balanced relations similar to the ones with other neighbors,' Salam said.
Asharq Al-Awsat added: 'Iran is the greatest loser with the change that had taken place in Syria. Perhaps it wants to compensate for this loss by maintaining its influence in Lebanon?'
Salam said: 'We have an interest in having the best relations with Iran. The other Arab countries share this same interest. Were this not the case, Saudi Arabia would not have reached the Beijing agreement with Iran.'
Pending issues with Syria
Turning to relations with Syria, Salam was asked about his meeting with interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Damascus earlier this year. He replied: 'I told him that we have long suffered from Syria's interference in our internal affairs. We are pleased with the change that has happened in Syria. I am also aware that they have suffered from the meddling by some Lebanese parties in their country.'
'We have both suffered. We are now ready to open a new chapter in Lebanese-Syrian relations based on mutual respect and non-interference in the affairs of the other,' the PM stressed.
The pending issues that exist between the two neighbors can only be resolved through joint efforts between them, he continued. 'Progress has already been made over cross-border smuggling, especially the smuggling of drugs and weapons. The drugs were being smuggled to the Gulf, which has tarnished Lebanon's image.'
He said that 'major cooperation' was taking place over this issue and it has been sponsored by Saudi Arabia through a meeting between the defense ministers in Jeddah.
Furthermore, Salam added that efforts were ongoing with Syria over securing their shared border. Other issues remain pending, such as Syrian detainees held in Lebanon. 'We are ready to discuss the issue with our Syrian brothers to reach a serious solution to this file. I informed them of this during my visit to Damascus. I reiterated this to Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani when we met in Baghdad on the sidelines of the Arab summit.'
'We are both eager to put this file behind us. There is also the issue of Syria refugees in Lebanon. This should be resolved between us and the Syrians and concerned international organizations,' he went on to say. Tens of thousands of Syrians have already returned home in recent months.
'We have declared that we support their safe and dignified return,' he remarked.
Salam added that he requested from Sharaa any information Syrian authorities have over 'internal issues that greatly concern Lebanon,' such as the case of the bombing of two mosques in the northern city of Tripoli in 2013 and the 2020 Beirut Port blast.
'Sharaa was very understanding of the requests. I believe we have a new opportunity with the new rulers in Syria to not just put the old relations between us, but to build a balanced relationship with our Syrian brothers,' he told Asharq Al-Awsat.
Asked about how he felt when he saw Sharaa seated at the presidential palace in Damascus instead of Bashar al-Assad, Salam replied: 'I used to be Lebanon's ambassador to the UN when Assad was in his post. Our position remains the same: We want for Syria what its own people want for it. We support what the Syrian people choose. We want to close the Assad chapter; Lebanon suffered a lot from it.'
Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa and PM Salam meet in Damascus on April 14. (AFP)
Ties with Saudi Arabia
'What about relations with Saudi Arabia?' asked Asharq Al-Awsat.
'Lebanon and Saudi Arabia enjoy historic relations,' he said, citing its major role in the Taif Accords that helped end Lebanon's 1975-90 civil war. He also singled out Prince Saud al-Faisal and his role in the Accords.
Ties between the two countries stretch before the agreement. 'The issue isn't just about bilateral relations. The Kingdom is now a major Arab Islamic international player,' stressed Salam. 'We are very keen on relations with the Kingdom and are seeking the greatest support from it in terms of pressuring Iran or supporting Lebanon in its reconstruction and attracting investments.'
He hoped that Saudi Arabia would soon lift its ban on its citizens from traveling to Lebanon. 'We can't say that we have returned to the Arab world; the Arab world must also return to Lebanon. The lifting of the ban would be a very significant development.'
The PM also acknowledged the concerns over the smuggling of drugs to Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom's ensuing decision to bar imports from Lebanon. Salam hoped that this issue would be resolved soon given that authorities have adopted tougher measures at various land and marine crossings.
'We do not want to smuggle captagon or other illicit material. This damages our image before it harms the Saudis and others. Lebanon's image has already been tarnished. Our country used to export books, ideas and engineers to the Arab world. This is the image that we want to restore,' Salam said.
Turning to the Gulf countries, he stressed that he is proud of the strides they have made and the accomplishments they have achieved, 'but at the same time, we lament the opportunities we have wasted.'
'Lebanon can be a natural partner to their rise,' he went on to say. He also noted the vision of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister, who wants to take the Arab world and Kingdom to 'not just the 21st Century but its second half through investments in AI and technology.'
'Lebanon, through its universities and human capabilities, is a natural partner to this renaissance project,' he declared.
War on corruption
Returning to Lebanon, Asharq Al-Awsat asked whether the 'war on corruption has started.' Salam said it is already underway. Two ministers are being persecuted, and one has been jailed on corruption charges. The other, unfortunately, managed to flee the country.
He noted that former public employees and judges are being persecuted for corruption.
'I am aware of how much Lebanon has suffered in recent years from the looting of public funds and waste that has taken place in several state sectors. We have a project to rebuild the country, which demands a number of issues that are founded on reforms.'
Asked if he regrets becoming prime minister, Salam said: 'I have been concerned with public affairs for dozens of years. I grew up in a family that is concerned in public affairs. I have written extensively about reforms in Lebanon. I saw an opportunity and seized it so that I can translate into reality the ambitious reform pledges of this (Aoun's) term.'
'I was encouraged by Aoun's swearing in speech. I am today seeking to implement whatever I can,' he revealed.
Asked about online campaigns against him, the PM explained that they are being waged by thousands of bots. 'They aren't even real people. They accuse me of treason and of being a Zionist. Does anyone really believe these claims? Do I need to prove my loyalty to my nation or my stances against Israel? I forgive those making the accusations because they themselves know that they are not true.'
'However, I do not forgive those who are manipulating their supporters with such claims. This is very dangerous, not because of the personal injury to me – I don't care about that – but because it could lead to civil strife in the country,' he warned.
'Those intimidating us with civil war should first concern themselves with removing the weapons that are the source of this strife,' he demanded.
'I sought last week to defuse tensions, but then came another party to stoke civil tensions by accusing me of being a Zionist and rallying their supporters. Let them cease such behavior, which only pits the people against each other. I am confident that the majority of the Lebanese people agree with me,' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Al Arabiya
7 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Exclusive Aoun tells Iran: No interference in our affairs, Hezbollah arms a Lebanese decision
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has told Al Arabiya in an interview that Beirut's message is clear: Iran should not interfere in Lebanon's internal affairs. Aoun said that he conveyed this directly to Iran's National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani, who visited Beirut last week. He said Lebanon's relationship with Iran 'is based on respect,' adding: 'Iran is a friendly state, but on the basis of preserving our sovereignty … our message is clear: Iran will not interfere in our affairs.' The president also stressed that the question of Hezbollah's weapons 'is a Lebanese decision and does not concern Iran.' Aoun said the US proposal delivered by envoy Tom Barrack included 'Israeli withdrawal and the revival of Lebanon's economy.' He explained that Lebanon had two choices: either accept the American paper or face isolation. 'But we did not receive any threats to implement the proposal's terms,' he added. 'We are waiting for Washington to secure Israel's approval of Tom Barrack's plan.' On his relationship with Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Aoun described it as 'more than excellent' and said he was open 'to discussing any issue, but only under the authority of the state.' He stressed that his top priority was 'ensuring the country's security and stability.' He continued: 'We are trying to spare Lebanon any internal or external conflicts, because they have exhausted us.' He also emphasized that 'the Shia community is an essential and influential component of our country. There is no threat to any sect, and I stand by my words.' Aoun welcomed 'anyone who wants to help Lebanon without interfering in our affairs.' He thanked Saudi Arabia for its support, noting that Riyadh played a role in ending Lebanon's presidential vacuum. He also stressed Lebanon's commitment to improving relations with Syria and demarcating the border 'under Saudi sponsorship.' 'We will not compromise on our relationship with Saudi Arabia,' Aoun said, adding that it dates back to the era of the Kingdom's founding king. On the economy, Aoun said: 'Our country is on the path to economic prosperity through the reforms we are implementing.' He emphasized that no one is above accountability, noting that the judiciary is working seriously to fight corruption. On the Palestinian file, Aoun said Lebanon 'has not opened the door to any direct dialogue with Israel' and reaffirmed Lebanon's firm rejection of resettling Palestinians. Regarding weapons in Palestinian refugee camps, he said: 'The decision to disarm the camps was taken by the Palestinian Authority itself, but the Iran-Israel conflict and Palestinian considerations have delayed implementation.' Lebanon's political circles are awaiting the arrival of US envoy Tom Barrack and Deputy Special Envoy for the Middle East Morgan Ortagus, who are expected in Beirut with new ideas on a plan to place all weapons under state control. The visit comes amid rising tensions following a speech by Hezbollah's leader, Naim Qassem, which sparked strong reactions and complicated the political scene. Qassem accused the government on Friday of 'handing Lebanon over to Israel' with its decision to strip Hezbollah of its weapons, warning this could lead to 'civil war.' Prime Minister Nawaf Salam denounced the remarks, rejecting what he described as a 'veiled threat.' Lebanese authorities have recently taken a firmer stance against Hezbollah and Tehran. Both President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam told Larijani last week that they reject 'any interference' in Lebanon's internal affairs, following Iran's criticism of the disarmament decision. For the first time in the history of Lebanon-Iran relations, senior Lebanese officials have spoken this bluntly and openly to an Iranian envoy. Iran remains Hezbollah's chief backer, providing money and weapons for decades. The government's move – described by Hezbollah's opponents as 'historic' – was framed as part of implementing the US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended the Hezbollah-Israel war on November 27. The decision stipulates that only Lebanon's official security and military institutions may carry weapons.


Arab News
7 hours ago
- Arab News
How Syria can move beyond division, achieve reconciliation
LONDON: Eight months after the fall of the Bashar Assad regime, the world is watching and hoping that Syria, despite its fragility, can avoid partition along sectarian lines. The latest crisis erupted in mid-July in the southern province of Suweida. On July 12, clashes broke out between militias aligned with Druze leader Sheikh Hikmat Al-Hijri and pro-government Bedouin fighters, according to Human Rights Watch. Within days, the fighting had escalated, with interim government forces deploying to the area. On July 14, Israel launched airstrikes on government buildings in Damascus and Syrian troops in Suweida with the stated aim of protecting the Druze community. Although they constitute just three to five percent of Syria's overall population, the Druze — a religious minority — make up the majority in Suweida, with further concentrations in Israel and the Israeli-occupied Golan. Diplomatic maneuvers quickly followed. On July 26, Israeli and Syrian officials met in Paris for US-mediated talks about the security situation in southern Syria. Syria's state-run Ekhbariya TV, citing a diplomatic source, said both sides agreed to continue discussions to maintain stability. The human cost has been severe. Fighting in Suweida has displaced roughly 192,000 people and killed at least 1,120, including hundreds of civilians, according to the UN refugee agency, citing a UK-based monitoring group. The bloodshed in Suweida has cast a long shadow over Syria's post-Assad transition. 'Syria is already fractured,' Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, told Arab News. 'The Druze region is under Druze control and the much more important northeast is ruled by the Kurdish-led SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces). 'The real question is whether (President Ahmad) Al-Sharaa's new government can bring them back under government control.' • Syria is home to eight major religious sects, including Sunni, Alawite, Twelver Shiite, Ismaili, Druze and several Christian denominations. • Its ethnic and cultural mosaic includes Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, Assyrians, Armenians, Yazidis and others with distinct identities. Analysts say the surge in violence reflects the fragility of Syria's political and social landscapes. 'This violence is not only disturbing; it's also revealing a lot about the internal dynamics inside Syria,' Ibrahim Al-Assil, who leads the Syria Project for the Atlantic Council's Middle East programs, told CNN last month. 'It also shows how fragile not only the ceasefires are but also the whole transition inside Syria.' Al-Assil said the turmoil also tests the ability of Syria's government, its society, and regional powers — including Israel — to guide the country toward stability. Despite a US-mediated ceasefire declared on July 16, sporadic clashes persist. Residents report severe shortages of food, fuel and medicine, blaming a government blockade — an allegation Syria's interim authorities deny. Camille Otrakji, a Syrian-Canadian analyst, describes Syria as 'deeply fragile' and so vulnerable to shocks that further stress could lead to breakdown. He told Arab News that although 'officials and their foreign allies scramble to bolster public trust,' it remains 'brittle,' eroded by 'daily missteps' and by abuses factions within the security forces. From a rights perspective, institutional credibility will hinge on behavior. Adam Coogle, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, stresses the need for 'professional, accountable security forces that represent and protect all communities without discrimination.' Coogle said in a July 22 statement that de-escalation must go hand in hand with civilian protection, safe returns, restored services and rebuilding trust. The battlefield map complicates the political storyline. Tensions between the SDF and government troops threaten an agreement reached in March to integrate the Kurdish-led coalition into the national military. Talks were set back earlier this month when the two sides clashed, with both accusing the other of striking first. The interim government announced it was backing out of talks planned in Paris in objection to a recent conference calling for a decentralized, democratic constitution. The August 8 meeting in the northeastern city of Hasakah brought together Kurds, Druze and Alawite figures and called for a new democratic constitution and a decentralized system that respects Syria's cultural and religious diversity. State-run news agency SANA quoted an official accusing the SDF-hosted event of having a separatist agenda and of inviting foreign intervention. Meanwhile, religion and identity remain combustible. The coalition of rebel groups that ousted Assad in December was led by Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, which was led by Al-Sharaa. The insurgent pedigree of parts of the new administration fuels mistrust among communities already raw from years of war. Meanwhile, fear continues to grip Alawite communities in coastal areas amid reports of ongoing revenge attacks. Assad belonged to the sect and promoted many in his government, making them a target since his downfall, even though most had nothing to do with his repression. A UN-backed commission that investigated violence in coastal areas in March found that killings, torture, looting and burning of homes and tents primarily targeted Alawites and culminated in massacres. These developments across the war-weary country have heightened fears of sectarian partition, though experts say the reality is more complex. 'The risk is real, but it is more complex than a straightforward territorial split,' Haian Dukhan, a lecturer in politics and international relations at the UK's Teesside University, told Arab News. 'While Syria's post-2024 landscape is marked by renewed sectarian and ethnic tensions, these divisions are not neatly mapped onto clear-cut borders.' He noted that fragmentation is emerging not as formal borders but as 'pockets of influence' — Druze autonomy in Suweida, Kurdish self-administration in the northeast, and unease among some Alawite communities. 'If violence persists,' Dukhan says, 'these local power structures could harden into semi-permanent zones of authority, undermining the idea of a cohesive national state without producing formal secession.' In Suweida, communal confidence is buoyed by a sense of agency — and by outside deterrence. Al-Hijri, the most prominent of Syria's three Druze leaders, has resisted handing control of Suweida to Damascus. 'There is no consensus between us and the Damascus government,' he told American broadcaster NPR in April. Landis, for his part, argues that Israel's military posture has been decisive in Suweida's recent calculus. Taken together, these incidents underscore the paradox of Syria's 'local' conflicts: even the most provincial skirmishes are shaped by regional red lines and international leverage. Against this backdrop, Damascus has drawn closer to Turkiye. On August 14, Reuters reported the two had signed an agreement for Ankara to train and advise Syria's new army and supply weapons and logistics. 'Damascus needs military assistance if it is to subdue the SDF and to find a way to thwart Israel,' Landis said. 'Only Turkiye seems willing to provide such assistance.' Although Landis believes it 'unlikely that Turkiye can help Damascus against Israel, it is eager to help in taking on the Kurds.' While the SDF has around 60,000 well-armed and trained fighters, it is still reliant on foreign backers. 'If the US and Europeans are unwilling to defend them, Turkiye and Al-Sharaa's growing forces will eventually subdue them,' said Landis. For Ankara, the endgame is unchanged. Turkiye's strategic aim is to prevent any form of Kurdish self-rule, which it views as a security threat, said Dukhan. 'By helping the government bring the Kurdish-led SDF into the national army and reopening trade routes, Turkiye is shaping relations between communities and Syria's place in the region.' Could there be more to Syria's flareups than meets the eye? Ghassan Ibrahim, founder of the UK-based Global Arab Network, thinks so. 'It looks like a sectarian conflict, but at the same time, it has a strong element of political ambition,' he told Arab News. He pointed to the unrest in Suweida as one example. 'On the surface, what happened there looks sectarian, but at its core, it's more about political autonomy.' Elaborating on the issue, he noted that Al-Hijri had long supported Assad and believed Suweida should have a degree of independent self-rule. 'When that ambition was crushed — by the (interim) government — things spiraled out of control, taking on a stronger sectarian appearance,' he said. 'But I still see it mainly as a struggle for power — each side is trying to bring areas under its control by force.' This perspective dovetails with Dukhan's view that 'sectarian identity in Syria is fluid and often intersects with economic interests, tribal loyalties and local security concerns.' He noted that 'even in areas dominated by one community, there are competing visions about the future.' That fluidity complicates any blueprint for stabilization. Even if front lines quiet, the political map could still splinter into de facto zones where different rules and loyalties prevail. To Landis, the government's current instinct is consolidation. He believes the leadership 'has chosen to use force to unify Syria,' which he adds 'has proven successful' in the coastal region 'because the Alawites are not united and had largely given up their weapons.' Success by force in one region, however, does not guarantee the model will travel. In Suweida, Israel's tripwire and Druze cohesion have raised the price of any government offensive. In the northeast, the SDF's numbers, organization, and foreign ties complicate any quick military integration. If raw power cannot produce a durable settlement, what could? For Dukhan, the transitional government's challenge is 'to prevent local self-rule from drifting into de facto partition by offering credible political inclusion and security guarantees.' That formula implies a real negotiation over autonomy, representation, and local policing — sensitive subjects that arouse deep suspicion in Damascus and among nationalists fearful of a slippery slope to breakup. Landis agrees that compromise is possible, but unlikely. 'Al-Sharaa has the option of compromising with Syria's minorities, who want to retain a large degree of autonomy and to be able to ensure their own safety from abuse and massacres,' he said. 'It is unlikely that he will concede such powers.' Still, experts say Syria can avoid permanent fracture if all sides — domestic and foreign — work toward reconciliation. As Syria's conflict involves multiple domestic factions and foreign powers, Ibrahim said international actors could foster peace by pressuring their allies on the ground. Responsibility, he stressed, lies with all sides. 'The way forward is cooperation from all,' he said. 'For example, Israel could pressure Sheikh Al-Hijri and make it clear that it's not here to create a 'Hijristan'.' Ibrahim was referring to the Druze leader's purported ambition to carve out a sovereign state in Suweida. Otrakji said that 'after 14 years of conflict, Syria is now wide open — a hub not just for diplomats and business envoys, but also for military, intelligence and public relations operatives.' The previous regime was rigid and combative, he said, but the new leadership 'seems intent on pleasing everyone.' That balancing act carries dangers — overpromising at home, underdelivering on reforms, and alienating multiple constituencies at once. Otrakji stressed that without full implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2254, Syria will remain trapped 'on a dizzying political rollercoaster' and in uncertainty. The UNSC reaffirmed on August 10 its call for an inclusive, Syrian-led political process to safeguard rights and enable Syrians to determine their future. Global Arab Network's Ibrahim concluded that Syria does not need regime change, but rather reconciliation, education and a leadership capable of dispelling the idea that this is a sectarian war. Sectarian and religious leaders, he said, 'must understand that Syria will remain one unified, central state with some flexibility — but nothing beyond that.'


Arab News
8 hours ago
- Arab News
Israel's moral compass cannot be abandoned to extremist rhetoric
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich's recent call to 'bury the idea of a Palestinian state' was not an isolated remark but part of a concerning pattern that undermines the very principles upon which Israel was founded. In 2023, he declared the Palestinian people to be 'an invention' and called for the West Bank village of Huwara to be 'wiped out' — statements that have generated distress both among Palestinians and within the international community, including Israel's closest allies. Such rhetoric, especially from a senior government official, risks eroding Israel's moral standing, weakening its diplomatic relationships and threatening the foundations of its security. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has similarly contributed to heightened tensions, asserting that his 'rights in the Land of Israel are more important' than those of Palestinians and advocating for changes to the status quo on the Temple Mount. Such actions and words carry the risk of igniting further instability in the region. The cumulative effect of these statements is to strain Israel's relationships with its allies, threaten its long-term security and make the path to coexistence more difficult for future generations. The consequences of such rhetoric are tangible and immediate. These statements provide adversaries with material to advance their own agendas, portraying Israel as resistant to peace and reinforcing cycles of radicalization. When extremism takes hold on one side, it too often fuels extremism on the other. It is incumbent upon Israel's leaders to break this cycle and to demonstrate a commitment to peace and justice. The diplomatic repercussions are already apparent. The US State Department has expressed its disapproval, while leaders across Europe have voiced serious concerns and some lawmakers are considering targeted measures. Even partners in the Abraham Accords have warned that such rhetoric could jeopardize the progress achieved toward normalization and cooperation. Responsible leadership must carefully safeguard these achievements, not place them at risk. The voices of extremism do not represent the broad, diverse and often moderate consensus of the Jewish people. Ronald S. Lauder The vast majority of Jews, both in Israel and throughout the diaspora, reject this form of extremism. They understand that such positions distract from Israel's legitimate security concerns and move the conversation away from pragmatic, peaceful solutions. This is not the vision that Theodor Herzl or the founders of Israel had for the state — a vision rooted in safety, democracy and moral purpose for all its citizens. Herzl's vision for Israel was clear: a state grounded in justice, coexistence and the highest civic values. In his writings, Herzl advocated for a nation that would uphold dignity and equality for all its inhabitants, regardless of religion or ethnicity. Upholding these ideals is essential not only for earning international respect but for ensuring Israel's own security and future. Departing from these principles risks isolating Israel and undermining its standing among nations. The voices of extremism do not represent the broad, diverse and often moderate consensus of the Jewish people. Such ideologies narrow Israel's prospects, empower its critics and make the prospect of a lasting peace more remote. True leadership seeks to expand the horizons of possibility, not limit them. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government bear the responsibility to speak clearly: these views do not reflect the values or official position of Israel. In such critical times, silence may be misconstrued as acceptance. As the Torah instructs: 'Tzedek, tzedek tirdof' — justice, justice you shall pursue. Israel's leaders must ensure their words and actions foster justice, peace and unity for all who call the nation home. History will judge whether Israel's leaders chose the path of vision, responsibility and unity or whether they allowed the nation's moral compass to be surrendered to voices of division. The choice before us is clear and the responsibility lies with those who lead. • Ronald S. Lauder is president of the World Jewish Congress. X: @lauder_ronald