Lebanon: on a major crisis and France’s curious policy…

An interview with Antonios Abou Kasm, international lawyer and professor of international law. Antonios Abou Kasm defended the Haoui family in his capacity as Principal Counsel – legal representative of the victims at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) during the trial concerning the assassination of Georges Haoui, an important political figure in Lebanon and former Secretary General of the Lebanese Communist Party. This trial will not take place under current circumstances, with the closure of the TSL at the end of 2023.

JF : After 15 years of a civil war that began in 1975, and despite the Taif Accords that put an end to this long ordeal in 1989, it seems that Lebanon has never emerged from a deep crisis affecting both the domestic political context and the country’s unique place in the Middle East. Today, however, we have the feeling that the situation has never been so serious, even threatening for the country itself… Do you agree with this assessment?

Antonios Abou Kasm : The situation in Lebanon is disastrous for a number of reasons. Obviously, today’s Lebanon no longer resembles the « Switzerland of the Orient » we once spoke of. The selective and incomplete implementation of the Taif Agreement has created political and constitutional practices that have led to the destruction of the rule of law, power-sharing on a communal and feudal basis, and fraudulent interpretations of the Constitution. Corruption has become commonplace. Public funds are distributed among dominant clans. The judiciary has been transformed into an authority at the service of the executive and the services. Demographics have been turned upside down with the arrival of 2.5 million Syrian refugees, while the Lebanese population has shrunk to less than 4 million due to the increasing emigration of young Lebanese. Public finances are running an unsustainable deficit, while the Central Bank is accused of pursuing a suspicious policy in collusion with the banking sector. Banks have confiscated the assets of the Lebanese for lack of solvency. Inflation is rising to alarming levels, at around 172%, with the exchange value of the US dollar rising from 1,500 Lebanese pounds (LL) to 150,000 LL last March! The price of the dollar, the ongoing power cuts and the very high price of fuel have led to the closure of many hospitals, schools, hotels and even industries. Public sector workers, judges and public school teachers are almost always on strike because of the drastic reduction in salaries. Thus, the collapse of state institutions and the major social crisis give the Lebanese crisis an « existential » dimension, exposing the state itself to the imminent danger of altering its sustainability.

JF : What is the connection between this long and dramatic evolution in Lebanon and, in August 2020, the gigantic explosion at the Port of Beirut (involving the detonation of 2,750 tonnes of ammonium nitrate), which killed 240 people and destroyed a large part of the city? Was this a circumstantial catastrophe, or is it part of the general crisis in Lebanon?

AAK : The Beirut port explosion was the result of corruption. Political and public sector corruption. Added to this is a mafia-style traffic in illegal arms linked to the armed conflict in Syria. Lebanon is still considered a private hunting ground for certain regional powers, where they install and nurture militias always ready to carry out their operations within the framework of so-called « proxy » wars. Legally speaking, the explosion in the port of Beirut could be qualified as a crime against humanity. A crime unquestionably committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population, and of course with full knowledge of the facts. The scale of this crime has prompted foreign powers, with connections to local leaders, to steer the investigation in such a way as to conceal the evidence, so as to be able to block the prosecution, using illegal procedures and in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and let all the real and false suspects go free, despite the fact that they had already been arrested.

JF : We know that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), set up by the United Nations in February 2007 to judge the terrorist attacks that destabilized Lebanon in 2005, will not be able to complete its judicial work. We remember in particular the major attack that killed former Prime Minister Rafic Hariri and 21 other people in February 2005. In reality, it was a series of attacks on public and political figures, such as Georges Haoui, former Secretary General of the Lebanese Communist Party, or Gebran Tueni, director of the leading daily An Nahar, and many others… In what way did these attacks also reflect this deep crisis in Lebanon, in its domestic political life and in its regional context?

AAK : The perpetration of these crimes had several aims: to limit freedom of expression, to lay siege to political life, to kill democracy in Lebanon, and to terrify the political scene so that it becomes inactive and subservient to power. The aim was to deprive Lebanon of its assets in an Arab world where authoritarian and religious regimes have taken over. The original Lebanese model of democracy and diversity is indeed a problem for political regimes in the Middle East.

The worst comes from the so-called « international community ». It has failed to deliver justice to the victims through the TSL (which owes its existence to a UN Security Council resolution). This tribunal only tried, in absentia, 5 members of Hezbollah accused of killing Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. It then ended its activities by virtue of a ruling by the Appeals Chamber confirming the guilt of 3 of the said Hezbollah members. However, the TSL (funded by voluntary contributions) has been unable to conduct trials in cases related to the attack on Rafik Hariri, namely the assassination of Mr Georges Haoui – former Secretary General of the Lebanese Communist Party, and the attacks on former ministers Marwan Hamadé and Elias El-Murr. Without prior notice, this « international community » suddenly decided to stop funding the TSL… while the Lebanese government was unable to continue financing the Court. And the UN Secretary-General was unable to find alternative means. Finally, we note that the Lebanese authorities do not dare arrest those convicted by the TSL, and that the Lebanese justice system does not dare examine the cases relating to the political assassinations that took place following the attack on Hariri.

JF : For some French commentators, the causes of the Lebanese crisis boil down to the inability of an outmoded and corrupt « political class » to face up to the country’s political and social challenges. There is certainly a great deal of truth in this… Major social mobilizations have demonstrated this. But is this the only explanation for what has been happening in Lebanon for so many years? How can we get out of this crisis?

AAK : We must remember that the corrupt political class has been supported and financed by regional and international powers. After Taif, Lebanon was placed under Syrian trusteeship as a compromise. It was only in 2004 that Western policy seriously changed, following President Jacques Chirac’s focus on the situation in Lebanon. Because of his friendship with Rafic Hariri. Resolution 1559 was adopted by the Security Council in September 2004. It called for the withdrawal of Syrian armed forces from Lebanese territory and the demilitarization of Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. In application of this resolution, the Syrians withdrew their troops from Lebanon in early 2005. But on February 14, a ton of TNT exploded as the Prime Minister’s convoy passed, killing 21 other people. The political class then took advantage of the Syrian withdrawal to forge new, sometimes contradictory alliances, ensuring a shared hold on power and the financing of their political projects.

The solution lies first and foremost in dissolving the Chamber of Deputies and electing new members of parliament in accordance with a new electoral law that complies with the Constitution and the criteria of equality and fair representation. The new parliament will have to initiate radical legislative reforms, principally guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary so that it becomes a truly independent power. Legislation is also needed to restructure the supervisory bodies of the administrative apparatus. On another level, the country needs legislative provisions to fill constitutional gaps, for example to prevent a power vacuum, as is currently the case with the presidency, or with regard to deadlines for the composition of the government by the Prime Minister-designate. Lebanon needs a Head of State who seriously believes in the rule of law. A President who assumes respect for Lebanese sovereignty within the framework of international legality and legitimacy.

Recovering confidence in Lebanon as a viable nation requires a non-selective application of the Constitution. Institutional reforms in application of the Taif Accords have unfortunately remained a dead letter. And the national committee for the abolition of political confessionalism required by the Taëf agreements has not been formed. The abolition of the confessional system, one of the Taif objectives, can only be achieved through the establishment of a Senate (where all spiritual families will be represented) following the election of the Chamber of Deputies on a national and non-confessional basis. However, civil society in Lebanon, along with the Lebanese left – which is poorly represented in Parliament – has not succeeded in taking over from the traditional progressive and reformist parties that pioneered secularism. The battle against the denominational system is a savage one, with some political parties relying so heavily on their denominational affiliation to gain power.

Moreover, Lebanon has no clearly defined borders with Syria. And Israel occupies part of Lebanese territory, permanently violating its national sovereignty. Following the Lebanese left’s decision to demilitarize in application of Taif, an Islamic military resistance (under the name Hezbollah) succeeded in seizing the role that had been won by the Lebanese National Resistance Front, the first military resistance against Israeli occupation. Hezbollah organized itself to drive the Israeli army out of the areas it occupied. The Islamic resistance then developed – with the help of Iran – into an organized regional armed group.

JF : How do you analyze the direct involvement of certain states in Lebanon, in particular Iran, through Hezbollah, and Saudi Arabia? Hezbollah is a real Lebanese political and military force, militarily very much involved in Syria alongside Bashar El Assad’s regime. Why is this so? As for Saudi Arabia, how can we fail to recall its violent political practices, in particular the horrific murder of journalist Jamal Kashoggi in 2018? We also recall that in November 2017, Saad Hariri, then Prime Minister of Lebanon, was taken hostage for 18 days by Mohamed Ben Salman, the Saudi Kingdom’s top leader, in order to influence Lebanon’s internal choices and force Saad Hariri to resign. Lebanon is often described as a « sounding board for regional contradictions ». Is it not, in fact, an arena of direct regional and international confrontation in which the United States and Russia are never absent? Could you explain this highly complex geopolitics to us in the most educational way possible?

AAK : Lebanon, the weakest link, was chosen yesterday as the territory through which to exercise the « duty of resistance » against Israel, previously the enemy of the Arab states… but no longer. We can see, for example, that Syria, despite Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights, has never opened the slightest battle on its borders to liberate the occupied territories. Despite Israeli raids targeting Damascus and its Iranian allies almost every week, and all over Syrian territory, there has been no Syrian response. The conflict with Israel is taking place in a proxy war waged mainly by Iran in agreement with its Syrian ally. In this role, Hezbollah’s ideology and discipline have strengthened its power. This has helped to expand Teheran’s sphere of action in most Arab countries.

Hezbollah’s involvement in the war in Yemen and its military support for the Houthist attacks on Saudi Arabia have made it an enemy of the Saudis. Their direct confrontation has moved to Beirut. On the other hand, Hezbollah has managed to reach a political agreement with Saad Hariri, who is in principle the Saudi’s main ally. The positive political cohabitation between Saad Hariri and Hezbollah, accused by the TSL in The Hague of the murder of his father Sheikh Rafic, posed a problem for the Saudi regime. The latter wanted to force Saad Hariri to resign as Prime Minister… because he is of Saudi origin. While Riyadh expected Saad Hariri to exploit his official position to isolate Hezbollah, Saad sought peace with the Shiite majority, to ensure at least continuity of power.

Lebanon, designated as a « buffer state », thus served as a battleground for the Iranian-Saudi conflict, and the country split into two main clans, leading to institutional deadlock. The Christians, in turn, were divided between pro-Saudi and pro-Iranian. A Christian majority, lacking the means to do so, decided to remain sheltered from this bipolarization. The regional and Western anti-Hezbollah front had begun to play the Syrian refugee card in Lebanon – mostly Sunni and hostile to Bashar Al-Assad’s regime – in order to change the demographic situation in Lebanon.

Despite the embryonic Saudi-Iranian and Saudi-Syrian entente today, Iran continues to play the Hezbollah card at the negotiating table for a distant peace in Yemen. Initially hostile to Saudi policy in the region, the Biden administration has sought to step up pressure on the Syrian regime. However, the Syrian regime has managed to regain Arab legitimacy. The American disruptive factor complicates the new Saudi policy in Lebanon, and offers Hezbollah a chance to maintain its resistance to Israeli violations of the « blue line » in southern Lebanon. Violations that are becoming more frequent as the pace increases. Russia has succeeded in stabilizing the Bashar Al-Assad regime by making it part of the new « model » alliance with Saudi Arabia on, so to speak, the Chinese axis. The United States is surrounded in the Middle East. The Israeli card seems to them the most inflammable and the most useful for breaking new alliances or agreements, and thus cornering the Arab states into a battle against Iran.

JF : How would you assess France’s involvement? In particular, how would you assess Emmanuel Macron’s so far fruitless attempts to overcome the current political impasse in Lebanon? Do you think France should play a role, in what spirit and for what objectives?

AAK : French involvement has never been interpreted as interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs. The Lebanese have always turned to France for help in difficult circumstances. But France, the historic ally of Lebanon’s Christians and their « tender mother », has changed alliances… France has opened up to other components of Lebanese society. It had tried alliances with both the Sunnis and the Shiites, without any real success. On the other hand, the new French alliances have complicated the role of Paris, which has succeeded in establishing friendly relations with Hezbollah. As a result, Hezbollah is gradually becoming a strategic ally for France. This entente with Hezbollah is based on commercial and oil interests, as well as political interests that extend beyond Lebanon to Iran, Hezbollah’s global sponsor.

Historically, France has supported the Lebanese Presidency, the only Christian one in the Arab world. The fact that Emmanuel Macron, for the Presidency to be elected, had tried for several months to support the candidacy of Christians, those chosen exclusively by Hezbollah, proves that France is de facto breaking the Christian political decision. The President of the Republic is the last base for Christians in Lebanon. He is the guarantor of the Constitution, of diversity and of Islamic-Christian dialogue. He is the « mediator » who ensures the balance between Sunnis and Shiites.

The reversal of French policy, on the grounds of political openness, has cost France dearly. President Macron’s two exceptional visits in the wake of the explosion in the Port of Beirut were, unfortunately, ruthless failures. The French President’s promises to the Lebanese could not be fulfilled due to the radical bipolar division of the Lebanese political scene.

France is advised to change its policy in Lebanon in order to remedy the weakening of the role of Christians, to maintain diversity in order to achieve a state based on civil law… otherwise Lebanon will soon turn into an Islamic republic. France sought a strong ally in Lebanon. It found Hezbollah. But this type of alliance carries the risk of leading to a radical change in Lebanon’s cultural identity. France must help integrate Hezbollah into Lebanese society, not the other way round.
France must be diligent in ensuring that it does not provide political support to corrupt Lebanese politicians. This type of support for Lebanese businessmen tarnishes the image of France, which should be thinking of Lebanon’s future with Lebanese elites seeking only the interests of the nation. Lebanon is almost the only French-speaking footprint in the Arab world, thanks to historical relations based on values such as liberty, fraternity and equality, which are contrary to the values of fanaticism, hate speech and religious and political discrimination.

France is invited to initiate an inter-Lebanese dialogue, based on the principles of the rule of law, democracy and the peaceful settlement of disputes, and on a non-corrupt Lebanese administration for all. Unfortunately, the operation of the Lebanese Constitution according to the Taif principles still requires the presence of an external sponsor exercising « regulatory » power. Prior to 2005, this role was amply fulfilled by the Syrian regime. Protecting Lebanon’s political system requires the courage to amend the Constitution in order to clarify the role of institutions and set clear limits to all discretionary powers. France should play a strong mediating role, in order to consolidate consensual consociative democracy in line with the national (or pactist) pact as an asset of the Lebanese multicultural system. Against any plans to partition, divide or apply « democracy of numbers » for discriminatory, eliminatory and unequal purposes.

The exceptional visit to Lebanon by former minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, President Macron’s personal envoy, represents an unprecedented opportunity. This signal from the Élysée demonstrates France’s determination to put the situation in Lebanon on the right track. Impartiality and objectivity must be the two pillars of a successful mission, which can encourage the Lebanese to solve their problems through dialogue on the nation’s future, away from corruption and fanaticism.