Articles

On February 14, 2005, it was not only a man who was assassinated, but an entire balance that shifted. The assassination of Rafic Hariri marked a turning point in Lebanon's modern history: the moment the country moved from direct tutelage to an internal conflict open to all eventualities. Twenty-one years later, the question seems to go beyond mere remembrance: what has changed? Where is Lebanon today? And if Hariri were still among us, how would he have managed this upheaval? From Earthquake to Division The assassination pushed hundreds of thousands of people into the streets, Syrian forces withdrew, and a deep division emerged between the March 14 and March 8 camps. But the liberation from tutelage did not lead to stability, but rather a long period of polarization around sovereignty, Hezbollah's weapons, and Lebanon's regional role.

A few weeks before the international Paris Conference scheduled for March 2026, whose goal is to mobilize international support for the Lebanese army, the army's commander-in-chief finds himself at a critical strategic turning point. In a Lebanon beset by political and regional uncertainties, every decision made on the ground or within the general staff can have repercussions far beyond its borders and influence not only the survival of the military institution, but also the international perception of its role as a national stabilizer. According to General Maroun Hitti, the army does not only face external and internal threats: it is subjected to cumulative pressure, where multiple mandates, ambiguous political decisions, and popular expectations combine to test its endurance, cohesion, and credibility. The stakes are twofold: maintaining its credibility in a volatile internal context and convincing the international community that the army remains an indispensable pillar of Lebanon's stability.

In the first part, we examined the evolution of Bitcoin from its inception to its current collapse. In this part, we detail the alternatives and the role of public authorities. Stablecoins: from retail convenience to systemic risk If Bitcoin is crypto’s flagship, stablecoins are its bloodstream. Stablecoins began as a simple tool: a way for retail traders to move between crypto and “dollars” without leaving the ecosystem. They promised stability in a volatile world. But stablecoins evolved. And today, they represent one of the most important—and underappreciated—systemic vulnerabilities in digital finance.

From its $126,000 all-time high to yesterday’s close near $69,000, Bitcoin—the poster child of cryptocurrencies—has lost approximately 45% of its value, wiping out an estimated $1.1 trillion in nominal investor wealth. Bitcoin’s latest crash is not just another bout of volatility. It is a stress test of the entire crypto architecture: the belief that ETFs created a permanent institutional bid, the assumption that stablecoins are “cash equivalents,” the rise of corporate leverage masquerading as long-term conviction, and the accelerating reality that states—China first, others inevitably following—intend to dominate the future of digital money.

In a particularly sensitive regional and domestic context, any assessment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) must go beyond a simple inventory of aid received and equipment required. The real issue lies in examining the political, doctrinal and strategic foundations of the military institution itself. The central question is not so much what the army possesses, but what the state expects – or refuses to take responsibility for – it to do. Since the late 2000s, the Lebanese army has benefited from sustained international assistance, notably from the United States, the United Kingdom, France and other European partners. This support has taken the form not only of equipment deliveries and new infrastructure, but above all, of the introduction of a structured capability-development approach. The establishment of a joint capability vision with the United States marked a turning point, prioritizing the optimization of existing assets rather than the creation of entirely new capabilities.

What unfolded before us was not a three-act Greek tragedy, but a lived experience: raw, immediate, degrading, and unforgivable. In less than two weeks, we watched unfold on our screens, in turn, a ludicrous comedy, a surreal situation, and a human catastrophe. Three distinct episodes, yet all exposing, revealing, and condemning the daily evils that continue to gnaw at a drained and weakened Lebanon. The Dunces’ Fair “What could this man possibly have in common with the people, this portly, pretentious bourgeois upstart, frequenting swanky bars, and a man who actually works… And is it not the greatest misery of our time that it is such a man who speaks for the people, who speaks among the people, who speaks about the people?”