Connect with us

Middle East

Lebanon: A welcoming land weakened by the Syrian crisis

Published

on

Syria is going through its third autumn of civil war, where the indiscriminate brutality from both sides is matched only the complexity of the geopolitical stakes beyond the Syrian context.  The whole region seems to be held hostage, with the people of Syria and its neighbours on the frontline.

Bound by its geographical proximity to its conflicted neighbour, and the inextricable social, societal and economic ties, Lebanon finds itself, again, a prisoner.

Since the beginning of the crisis in March 2011, almost a million refugees have flowed through the open border between Lebanon and Syria. Lebanon’s population, estimated at around 4 million prior to the crisis, has swollen to such an extent that it is estimated that Syrian nationals now account for a almost a fifth of the current inhabitants.

Lebanon has long served as a harbour for those displaced by territorial disputes or conflicts in the region, and has sought to treat those seeking refuge with humanity and a sense of brotherhood. Although it has been shaken by chaotic events in its recent history, deep-rooted ties run between these countries – not least a widespread shared family heritage between many Syrian and Lebanese families.

Yet in recent weeks a crisis has emerged to which the international community cannot stay numb.

Lebanon occupies a delicate equilibrium between disparate religious sects and communities, a position achieved in no small part due to two years of mediation by the caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati. The influx of many hundreds of thousands of displaced Syrians places this balance in jeopardy, and threatens to collapse a number of uneasy alliances.

Deciding to interact with Hezbollah was no easy decision for Mikati’s government, and demonstrates the political influence and clout this faction possesses within the Lebanese political arena. It is this leverage which Iran wishes to retain within the Syrian conflict. [The Iranian position was reiterated as Iran has opened to the USA, UK, France and the international community in general since the new Iranian President, Hassan Rohani, was elected in June 2013.

In economic terms, the World Bank estimated in a recent report that the Syrian crisis has resulted in direct losses to Lebanon of over €5.5 billion since 2012. The government’s income is thought to have decreased by nearly €880 million in 2013, its third consecutive year of budgetary contraction. Conversely, public spending has increased by 28% to provide emergency medical services and public service. This unsustainable deficit has led, amongst other things, to an exceptionally high tax burden on Lebanon’s working population.

01qu

The influx of many hundreds of thousands of displaced largely Sunni Syrians places this balance in jeopardy, and threatens to dangerously destabilise the entire country

01qd

First and foremost however, the consequences are disastrous in terms of the fragile social and religious cohesion which emerged from the Taef agreements of October 1989. These ended a 15 year long civil war that decimated Lebanon between 1975 and 1990, a conflict that has many painful parallels with the current tragic events in Syria.

There is a significant risk that the precarious balance between Shi’as and Sunnis (59.7%% of the population) and Maronite Christians (39%) will collapse if the national unity that the coalition government has been pursuing since previous Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned in 2011, fails. The influx of many hundreds of thousands of displaced largely Sunni Syrians places this balance in jeopardy, and threatens to dangerously destabilise the entire country.

Crime has doubled – even possibly tripled in certain areas of Lebanon; and more and more Lebanese nationals are forced to leave their country due to the increasing cost of living.

Education is the best example of the challenges Lebanon is currently facing. The 330,000 Lebanese children in education are dwarfed by the 500,000 Syrian children, who have sought refuge in Lebanon with their parents, in need of school places. Access to education is a fundamental entitlement for these children, and their greatest hope of overcoming the traumatic and inhumane war they are victims of. But Lebanon’s educational infrastructure is fast approaching a point where it can no longer support these children.

Unlike some of its neighbours, Mikati’s government has deliberately chosen to ascribe the Syrians as ‘displaced people’ and not as ‘refugees’. Beyond this symbolic measure, the priority for the Lebanese Prime Minister is now to reach out to its European partners, especially Germany, the UK and France, and emphasise that the issue is now beyond Syria’s immediate neighbours.

France has decided to welcome 500 refugees and Germany 5000. The difference is sizeable, and it demonstrates that Berlin realises the vast challenges encountered by the Lebanese government better than Paris. The Lebanese Prime Minister recently reiterated to the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, that the security and stability of his country will be key to the peaceful resolution of the Syrian crisis.

The Geneva II Conference, originally due at the end of this month, but now not likely to take place before the end of year, will be, if it goes ahead, a crucial opportunity to address the Syrian refugee crisis, and the profound socio-economic this humanitarian crisis has had on Syria’s neighbours. There are now more than 550,000 Syrian refugees in Jordan and 600,000 in Turkey, 125,000 in Egypt, and 202,000 in Iraq, whilst the latest estimations suggest an influx of at least 800,000 registered refugees in Lebanon and an additional 300,000 non-registered.  

The main players of the Geneva II Conference preparing Syria’s peaceful future: Iran, the USA and Russia should also include this issue on their agendas, as it is a prerequisite in the process of national and regional reconciliation that has been so damaged in the last two and a half years of turmoil.

As we are left speculating on the strategic divergences, consequences and disillusions arising from the Arab Spring, the emergence of a ‘new Lebanon’ could be used as an example for its neighbours. This transition relies on the closure of past wounds and would be a model of quiet transition in the Middle East and North Africa region.

Moreover, time is giving credence to Najib Mikati’s adherence to the concept of “dissociation”, so that the burden of the Syrian crisis does not weaken the already fragile Lebanese State. Nonetheless one cannot ignore the fact that these countries’ future depend on each other, and that Lebanon shares much more with Syria than a communal border.

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

US-Iran Tension: Avert any big disaster to humanity

Published

on

US-Iran tension is growing to a dangerous level. Irrespective of who is right and who is wrong, but everyone agrees that it is leading toward a big disaster. Human life and natural resources are at stake. Irrespective, who will suffer more and who will suffer less, but it is human life, which is the most precious thing in this world, is at stake.

Middle-East is an oil and gas-rich area and meets the major portion of world energy demand. Any disturbance in this region will have a severe impact on the global economy. Whether one is right or wrong, will be the victim of this crisis directly or indirectly.

This war will be not like the Iraq war or the Libya War. As at that time, there was only one superpower and the world was unipolar. There was no resistance from any corner of the world. US and allies, without any resistance, conducted the war and achieved their desired results. But a lot of resistance was witnessed in case of Syrian War. The whole scenario has been changed, the calculated results were not achieved yet. Finally, the US has decided to pull back its troops. Similarly, Afghanistan case is not ideal, after spending trillion dollars, and fighting for 17 years, not gains on the ground and finally has to pull back.

It may not be limited to only US-Iran but may engulf the whole region. As traditional rivals are waiting for an appropriate opportunity to settle their old disputes. Whether, it is Arab-Iran, or Israel-Iran, or Arab-Israel enmity, may it spread to a much wider sphere than expected. It is in control of a few countries to start or refrain the escalation, but once it has been broken, it may be beyond the control of either country.

Especially, Russia and China are not sleeping at this time. They are in a strong position to offer resistance. It should not be taken an easy task like Iraq or Libya war. It is difficult to predict the exact reaction of Russia or China, but anticipated resistance.

If we expect, US or Iran to avert this foreseeable war will be not a realistic approach. As if they were to avoid any disaster, they should not have created so hype and should not have moved to this stage. They may not accept total hegemony of the US in this part of the world. They have heavy stakes in the middle-East and cannot be spectators only.

Geopolitics has been changed, regional alliances have emerged, and nations have re-aligned themselves. Much more complex changes have been witnessed after the war on terror. Public awareness has been enhanced, maybe some of the governments in this region have a different outlook, but public opinion is much more realistic and may play a vital role in the days to come. Old time’s friends may stand on the other side of the table. Some radical changes may be visible on grounds.

UN role was ineffective in the past and a little is expected in the future. In fact, the UN has been hijacked and curtailed to a very limited role practically. While one of its major mandates was to resolve the disputes among nations and avoid wars or war-like situations.

Under this serious scenario, there is a hope that all peace-loving nations and individuals, may peruse the UN and International Community do something to avert this bid human disaster.  We all share one world, we have the responsibility to save this world. Any loss of human life in any part of the world is considered the loss to the whole of humanity. And the destruction of natural resources may be considered a loss to humanity. Any damage to Environment or ecology or biodiversity may be a net loss to humanity. We all are son and daughter of ADAM and share a common world, common environment, common resources. We need to protect humanity, environment and natural resources.

It is strongly appealed to the UN, International Community and all individuals who believe in Peace, must act, and must act now, and must act strongly, to avert any bid disaster to humanity.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Chinese purchases of Iranian oil raise tantalizing questions

Dr. James M. Dorsey

Published

on

A fully loaded Chinese oil tanker ploughing its way eastwards from two Iranian oil terminals raises questions of how far Beijing is willing to go in defying US sanctions amid a mounting US military build-up in the Gulf and a US-China trade war.

The sailing from Iran of the Pacific Bravo takes on added significance with US strategy likely to remain focused on economic rather than military strangulation of the Iranian leadership, despite the deployment to the Gulf of an aircraft carrier strike group as well as B-52 bombers and a Patriot surface-to-air missile system.

As President Donald J. Trump, backed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, appears to be signalling that he is not seeking military confrontation, his administration is reportedly considering a third round of sanctions that would focus on Iran’s petrochemical industry. The administration earlier this month sanctioned the country’s metals and minerals trade.

The sailing raises the question whether China is reversing its policy that led in the last quarter of 2018 to it dramatically reducing its trade with Iran, possibly in response to a recent breakdown in US-Chinese trade talks.

“The question is whether non-oil trade remains depressed even if some oil sales resume, which I think it will. That’s the better indicator of where Chinese risk appetite has changed. Unfortunately Iran‘s reprieve will be limited—but better than zero perhaps,” tweeted Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, head of Bourse & Bazaar, a self-described media and business diplomacy company and the founder of the Europe-Iran Forum.

A Chinese analyst interviewed by Al Jazeera argued that “China is not in a position to have Iran’s back… For China, its best to stay out” of the fray.

The stakes for China go beyond the troubled trade talks. In Canada, a senior executive of controversial Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei is fighting extradition to the United States on charges of violating US sanctions against Iran.

Reports that Western companies, including Kraft Heinz, Adidas and Gap, wittingly or unwittingly, were employing Turkic Muslims detained in re-education camps in China’s north-western province of Xinjiang, as part of opaque supply chains, could increase attention on a brutal crackdown that China is struggling to keep out of the limelight.

The Trump administration has repeatedly criticized the crackdown but has stopped short of sanctioning officials involved in the repressive measures.

Bourse & Bazaar’s disclosure of the sailing of the Pacific Bravo coincided with analysis showing that Iran was not among China’s top three investment targets in the Middle East even if Chinese investment in the region was on the rise.

The Pacific Bravo was steaming with its cargo officially toward Indonesia as Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif was touring his country’s major oil clients, including China, in a bid to persuade them to ignore US sanctions.

A second tanker, the Marshal Z, was reported to have unloaded 130,000 tonnes of Iranian fuel oil into storage tanks near the Chinese city of Zhoushan.

The Marshall Z was one of four ships that, according to Reuters, allegedly helped Iran circumvent sanctions by using ship-to-ship transfers in January and forged documents that masked the cargoes as originating from Iraq.

The unloading put an end to a four-month odyssey at sea sparked by buyers’ reticence to touch a cargo that would put them in the US crosshairs.

“Somebody in China decided that the steep discount this cargo most likely availed … was a bargain too good to miss,” Matt Stanley, an oil broker at StarFuels in Dubai, told Reuters.

The Pacific Bravo, the first vessel to load Iranian oil since the Trump administration recently refused to extend sanction exemptions to eight countries, including China, was recently acquired by China’s Bank of Kunlun.

The acquisition and sailing suggested that Bank of Kunlun was reversing its decision last December to restrict its business with Iran to humanitarian trade, effectively excluding all other transactions.

The bank was the vehicle China used in the past for business with Iran because it had no exposure to the United States and as a result was not vulnerable to US sanctions that were in place prior to the 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program.

China’s willingness to ignore, at least to some extent, US sanctions could also constitute an effort to persuade Iran to remain fully committed to the nuclear accord which it has so far upheld despite last year’s US withdrawal.

Iran recently warned Europe that it would reduce its compliance if Europe, which has struggled to create a credible vehicle that would allow non-US companies to circumvent the sanctions, failed to throw the Islamic republic an economic lifeline.

In a letter that was also sent to Russia and China, Iran said it was no longer committed to restrictions on the storage of enriched uranium and heavy water stocks, and could stop observing limits on uranium enrichment at a later stage.

Russian president Vladimir Putin warned in response to the Iranian threat that “as soon as Iran takes its first reciprocal steps and says that it is leaving, everyone will forget by tomorrow that the US was the initiator of this collapse. Iran will be held responsible, and the global public opinion will be intentionally changed in this direction.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

The Iran Question

Dr. Arshad M. Khan

Published

on

Will there be war with Iran?  Will there not be war with Iran?  The questions are being asked repeatedly in the media even though a single carrier task force is steaming up there.  The expression is old for the latest carriers are nuclear powered.  Imagine the mess if it was blown up.

There are two kinds of weapons in the world … offensive and defensive.  The latter are cheaper, a fighter plane compared to a bomber.  If a country does not (or cannot afford to) have offensive intent, it makes sense to focus on defense.  It is what Iran has done.  Moreover, its missile centered defense has a modern deadly twist — the missiles are precision-guided. 

As an Iranian general remarked when questioned about the carrier task force:  some years ago it would’ve been a threat he opined; now it’s a target.  Iran also has a large standing army of 350,000 plus a 120,000 strong Revolutionary Guard and Soviet style air defenses.  In 2016 Russia started installation of the S-300 system.  It has all kinds of variants, the most advanced, the S-300 PMU-3 has a range similar to the S-400 if equipped with 40N6E missiles, which are used also in the S-400.  Their range is 400 km, so the Iranian batteries are virtually S-400s.  The wily Putin has kept trump satisfied with the S-300 moniker without short-changing his and China’s strategic ally.  The latter continuing to buy Iranian oil.

Iran has friends in Europe also.  Angela Merkel in particular has pointed out that Iran has complied fully with the nuclear provisions of the UN Security Council backed Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action i.e. the Iran nuclear deal.  She is mustering the major European powers.  Already alienated with Trump treating them as adversaries rather than friends, they find Trump’s bullying tiresome.  President Macron, his poll ratings hitting the lowest, is hardly likely to engage in Trump’s venture.  In Britain, Theresa May is barely able to hold on to her job.  In the latest thrust by senior members of her party, she has been asked to name the day she steps down.

So there we have it.  Nobody wants war with Iran.  Even Israel, so far without a post-election government does not want to be rained upon by missiles leaky as its Iron Dome was against homemade Palestinian rockets.

Topping all of this neither Trump nor Secretary of State Pompeo want war.  Trump is as usual trying to bully — now called maximum pressure — Iran into submission.  It won’t.  The wild card is National Security Adviser John Bolton.  He wants war.  A Gulf of Tonkin type false flag incident, or an Iranian misstep, or some accident can still set it off. 

In Iran itself, moderates like current President Hassan Rouhani are being weakened by Trump’s shenanigans.  The hard liners might well want to bleed America as happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy