Lebanon’s days of claiming a coveted status in the region are long gone, as this little Mediterranean country, which celebrated its centennial in September of 2020, is struggling to stay afloat amidst the worst political and economic crisis the country has experienced since its inception. The country’s collapse was all but foreordained, as the Lebanese ruling establishment, a confederation of sectarian warlords turned politicians, was content to operate an ultraliberal economy turned Ponzi scheme subsidized by the oil-rich Gulf states. This system ultimately collapsed when the Arab Gulf states were no longer willing to bankroll the corruption, especially when Iran’s proxy Hezbollah and their allies consolidated power and elected former president Michel Aoun as president in 2016.
Recently, the Biden administration through the mediation of Amos Hochstein, the Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, successfully concluded the maritime demarcation talks between Lebanon and the Israel, which will help these two opposing nations exploit the resources of the Eastern Mediterranean Gas fields which they share and thus alleviate the energy needs of many of the European nations brought about by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This US sponsored deal promises economic salvation and a new phase of stability and prosperity for the region, yet the enthusiasm of the Americans only underscores the capriciousness of the US foreign policy vis-a-vis Lebanon as well as the regional implications of such a haphazard approach.
The United States involvement in Lebanon, at least during the Cold War, had been determined by the various presidential doctrines and the willingness of a particular administration to invest in the stability of such a small country as Lebanon. Accordingly, the landing of the US Marines on the shores of Lebanon in 1958- upon the directive of the Eisenhower doctrine- helped end hostilities between the different local factions who were vying for power. It consequently placed Lebanon on a virtual pedestal of importance.
While the Reagan administration in 1982 doubled down and sent peacekeepers to Lebanon during the civil war and the ongoing Israel invasion, the suicide bombing of the US Embassy and the US Marine barracks by the Islamic Jihad, the precursors of Hezbollah, forced the US to reevaluate any future involvement in the Lebanese quagmire, and ultimately lead them to accept the Syrian regime's custodianship over the country in 1989, through the Saudi sponsored Taif agreement which ended Lebanon’s 15 years of civil war. Consequently, over the next few decades, the US interest in Lebanon and the region diminished considerably until the US liberation of Iraq saw the Bush administration refocus on Lebanon, especially following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, a crime which was later revealed to have been carried out by Hezbollah.
Overall, the United States foreign policy investment in Lebanon has been characterized by a lack of long-term vision, as well as the absence of any real bipartisan commitment to shielding Lebanon from dubious bargains with regional actors. Most recently, the Iranian expansionist project led by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps -- through the weapons of Hezbollah and a Faustian deal with Lebanon’s corrupt political elite-- has taken the country hostage.
The Biden administration has time and again reiterated its commitment to help drive structural reform of Lebanon’s archaic system, yet its obsession with reinstating the JCPOA with Iran has led it to relax the Trump-era maximum pressure campaign which was implemented on Iran and its regional proxies. Such punitive measures included the sanctioning of corrupt Lebanese politicians chiefly amongst them, former President Aoun’s son-in-law and political heir Gebran Bassil under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. This was a clear message that in the absence of an independent Lebanese judiciary the only way forward was to treat these so-called politicians as the criminals they truly are.
As it stands, the Lebanese parliament has yet to elect a new president to replace Michel Aoun, whose term expired on the 31 of October, thus leaving the country in a limbo which further exposes Lebanon and its people to more political and economic hardship. The pro-Iran factions led by the speaker of Parliament, Nabih Berri, the Shiite leader of the Amal Movement, have simply refused to allow the elections to take place without first agreeing on a consensus president, claiming that the required quorum for the election sessions should always be 2/3 of the 128 members, a constitutional heresy to say the least. While Hezbollah claims that it is willing to endorse anyone who is not outwardly hostile to its weapons, in reality it wishes to elect Gebran Bassil who can continue to provide it with the ostensible Christian legitimacy it requires.
Consequently, all sides involved, including those who claim to oppose Iran, are wagering on a regional and international deal, somewhat similar to Taif - one which would reset the country and rearrange the power sharing formula and wipe out its debts: far-fetched scenario to say the least. At present, however, all the relevant powers -- the United States, Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies -- have other priorities. Lebanon is thus left to its fate and to the whims of a ruling establishment that uses corruption as well as Hezbollah’s weapons to cling to power.
Faced with this bleak reality, the Lebanese are faced with few options. Those who have the chance to immigrate have done so, triggering one of the worst mass exoduses in the history of the nation, while those who could not have lingered behind. Yet what is more destructive than this migration is the fact that Lebanon’s existence is at risk, as its educational as well as health systems have been dealt a severe blow by the departure of some of the best and brightest scholars and physicians who simply decided to abandon their memories of home and seek a safer future elsewhere. As a result, what Lebanon is currently undergoing is no simple brain drain but rather an irreversible process, as the Lebanese educational system, formerly renowned for its excellence, will no longer be capable of producing the next generation of educated citizens. These people will be needed to rebuild their country when the time is right, and this is where the United States can play a vital role.
Given that the Biden administration has shown no real interest in wielding any form of hard power, such as sanctions, or pushed for the removal of the Lebanese ruling elite, the United States needs to commit to protecting Lebanon by deploying one of the most effective and enduring weapons in its arsenal, soft power.
For my students at the American University of Beirut, one of the oldest and most enduring models of a liberal arts education, their study of the foreign policy record of the United States in the Middle East has left them full of doubts and skepticism. They have seen how different administrations have failed to comprehend what is really at stake and more often than not take actions based on trial and error not to say spite, often ending in abysmal failure. For these young men and women who are lucky enough to afford the tuition or to receive any form of financial aid to study at AUB, American foreign policy simply does not live up to the values and standards which are promoted by the U.S. government and its different forms of super power. Instead they have learned that the so-called art of realpolitik dictates that super powers will sacrifice or sell out small countries such as Lebanon, when and if the price is right.
Hence, the United States and its regional allies, at least what remains of them, should focus on protecting Lebanon and what remains of its population, not merely for its own sake, but rather in order to prevent rogue states such as Syria and Iran from taking Lebanon and the region hostage. To achieve this the United States should lead an international effort to establish safe havens for any and all those who wish to acquire an education, or proper healthcare or even access to food, for these are the necessities that allow them to stand up to their local dictators and their regional patrons, when the time comes.
Under no circumstances should the United States and any international donor agency send any form of aid to the Lebanese state and its various agencies. These corrupt institutions have time and again used the people of Lebanon as a pretext to siphon billions of dollars of aid. Such a commitment naturally does not replace the need for the United States, and the Lebanese people, to continue to openly and staunchly demand structural reforms. Lebanon must be fully sovereign, and Hezbollah must be fully disarmed. The judiciary must become independent and capable of upholding the rule of law. The pillars of a true state must be resurrected.
Lebanon is light years away from regaining any semblance of normalcy, yet for it to fully recover its people should stop looking for change from abroad, be it from the United States or any other outside power, and instead embrace a political and economic system that is capable of weathering and thriving within a turbulent and precarious region.
Makram Rabah is a lecturer at the American University of Beirut, Department of History. His book Conflict on Mount Lebanon: The Druze, the Maronites and Collective Memory (Edinburgh University Press) covers collective identities and the Lebanese Civil War.
