Why Opening a New Chapter Between Lebanon and Syria Is an Absolute Necessity

There is a heavy legacy between Lebanon and Syria, but there are also many opportunities. The past between the two countries weighs enormously. From independence under the Mandate in 1920 to actual independence in 1943, and through the most recent phases, issues have piled up to the point where fraught relations between the two countries have become an almost permanent state of affairs. But the time has come for this to end and for a new chapter to be opened, one whose fundamental principle is mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs.

The bitter experience of Syrian tutelage, which the Lebanese endured from Syria’s entry into Lebanon in 1976 until the military withdrawal of April 26, 2005, remains deeply etched in their memory. That withdrawal came amid the international reactions that followed the assassination of President Rafic Hariri on February 14 of the same year. While analyzing the reasons behind Syria’s entry into Lebanon would require articles of its own, the period that marked the height of the tutelage began after Syria’s participation in the operation to liberate Kuwait in 1990, when its control over Lebanon was effectively granted as a kind of “reward.”

The Lebanese naturally remember how Syria’s administration of Lebanon evolved into a form of direct rule, exercised through the Syrian intelligence headquarters in Anjar, the Beau Rivage and other sites, where figures from the former regime deliberately humiliated Lebanese officials and issued orders to them with great condescension and little regard for even the most basic requirements of national dignity.

It also goes without saying that the Lebanese have not forgotten the political assassinations carried out in Lebanon against opinion leaders, intellectuals and politicians, from Kamal Jumblatt to Rafic Hariri, nor the intimidation, arrests and suppression of freedom of expression and other liberties. The tutelage nearly turned Lebanon into a regime modeled on the Syrian system, with sham elections of no real consequence, whose sole purpose was to complete the political façade.

The important thing is that this chapter has now been closed. More important still, however, is to think seriously about how to build strong future relations based on trust, respect and shared interests, and how to prevent either country from once again being drawn into harming the other or seeking to take control of it, as happened in the previous period. Some Lebanese official and non-official circles must also move beyond hesitation or indifference toward developing these relations in the right direction, in a way that serves the interests of both countries.

The abolition of the Lebanese-Syrian Higher Council was a step in the right direction toward restoring relations to their natural framework: relations between two fully independent states linked by many shared interests, to be managed through normal diplomatic channels, namely through their embassies. These relations can also be elevated to the level of joint or ministerial committees dealing with specific sectoral issues.

Yet, despite all that has been said above about the need to restore “normality” to Lebanese-Syrian relations, it is essential to overcome some of the obstacles that impede progress in many areas, without this implying a return to the old formulas, particularly in foreign policy. While a return to the formula of the “unity of tracks and destinies,” which dominated Lebanese foreign policy in the 1990s and in practice deprived Lebanon of the ability to formulate an independent policy outside the Syrian orbit, is entirely unacceptable, this does not mean that coordination should cease, especially on regional issues and in the context of the conflict with Israel.

Lebanon and Syria are both suffering from Israeli military expansion. The former has endured its share of destruction and occupation over the course of two successive wars, while the latter has also seen new portions of its territory occupied. Both countries face daily violations of their national sovereignty. And while the idea of a direct military confrontation with Israel is on the table neither in Lebanon nor in Syria, coordination of political and diplomatic positions is highly beneficial to both countries.

In the security sphere, coordination is more than necessary in order to dismantle what remains of drug-trafficking networks, Captagon trafficking, human trafficking and smuggling. This must be pursued firmly by both sides, as such activities cause serious harm to both countries. As for the possibilities of economic, electricity and trade cooperation, they are many, indeed very many, and require particular attention from the official authorities in both countries.

Turning the page on the past is therefore not enough. What is needed is serious thought about the future, especially as the region is undergoing unprecedented changes on multiple levels and Israeli threats have also reached an advanced stage. This makes even a minimum degree of Lebanese-Syrian “harmony” an urgent necessity.