By
Michael Young
February 19, 2015
As prospects for the emergence of new sectarian and
ethnic entities rise in the Middle East to replace illegitimate, authoritarian
states, it is necessary to ask what will happen to Lebanon, the only Arab state
that has sought to build its political system around a formula for sectarian
compromise.
Lebanon’s most pressing danger is the presence of some
1.5 million Syrian refugees in the country, most of them Sunnis from areas the
Assad regime considers vital for its political survival. Many have fled Homs
and Qalamoun, which sit on vital communication lines between Damascus and the
coast. These are both places the regime intends to retain, even as it has given
up on far-flung districts that it has no real hope of controlling, such as
Syria’s north, northeast and east.
Bringing back hundreds of thousands of Sunnis to Homs
and its environs, the vulnerable neck of Bashar Assad’s “useful Syria,” is not
something the regime in Damascus intends to do, amid rumors that the Iranians
have resettled friendlier Shiite populations there from outside Syria and even
the region. So, what happens to most of the refugees now in Lebanon?
Developments don’t offer much of an answer, let alone
provoke optimism. Barring a major victory by the regime to retake all of Syria,
which seems highly unlikely, the country will continue to fragment.
Illustrating this, Syria’s Kurds last Friday declared their intention of pursuing
the “geographic and political unity” of Kurdish areas in the context of a
“federal state.” Under the circumstances, however, that is less than what they
hope to achieve – indeed what is achievable – namely a virtually independent
Kurdish entity in a very loose state structure.
Is the permanent settlement of Syrian refugees in
Lebanon a possibility, as some Lebanese have warned? Certainly it is, and what
is more worrisome is that there are those Lebanese willing to go along with
such a project, seeing that it will boost Sunni demographics at the expense of
Shiites. International humanitarian organizations have insisted that Lebanon is
obliged to care for the refugees, but have given scant attention to the
long-term, political implications of their presence.
That is not to justify the disgraceful calls to expel
the refugees, itself an utterly unrealistic option in light of the vast numbers
involved. However, Lebanon must start raising international awareness of the
lasting repercussions of the Syrian refugee presence, particularly in light of
the problems accompanying the Palestinian refugee presence in Lebanon after
1948.
It took nearly two decades for the Palestinian
refugees to be mobilized politically, and the consequences were devastating for
the Lebanese. The possibility of this happening again with Syrians is
infinitely more worrisome. If the refugees come to form the core of a new
insurgency operating from outside Syria, Lebanon would very quickly be caught
up in the maelstrom.
However, one factor alone plays in Lebanon’s favor.
Iran has helped provoke Syria’s fragmentation – no less than Iraq’s – believing
that its influence is much easier to exercise in an Arab world broken up into
countless ministates. But those who could be expected to lose most from the
massive rise in the Sunni population in Lebanon are Shiites, and it is doubtful
that the Iranians or Hezbollah would welcome this.
So what are the options for Assad, Tehran and
Hezbollah? To eventually allow a return of Sunnis to Syria, but then to ensure
that they will not resettle in the strategic Homs and Qalamoun areas from where
they originate? Perhaps, but how easy is that? After engaging in ethnic
cleansing in those areas in recent years, the regime would have to do so again,
this time pushing the population into parts of Syria where Sunnis are a
majority and over which today only ISIS has some control. This would not only
be complicated, it would be no solution at all.
Populations are not sacks of potatoes. As the regime’s
intent becomes clearer, the refugees will understandably resist it and many
will refuse to leave Lebanon. Ultimately, the thinking may be that if a Sunni
ministate emerges in Iraq, a broader Sunni state between Iraq and Syria may
attract rural Syrian Sunnis. However, such a view smacks of wishful thinking
and hubris, and may well perpetuate sectarian conflict in Syria indefinitely.
Worse, from Lebanon’s perspective it may heighten domestic sectarian hostility,
damaging communal relations.
The simple fact is that there is no good solution to
the Iranian and Syrian regimes’ efforts to engage in durable sectarian
cleansing in Syria. All scenarios are either unrealistic, flawed or damaging to
those most closely allied with Tehran.
Beyond that, the millions of Syrians in Lebanon, Jordan
and Turkey are a potential reservoir of difficulties not only for the region
but also for the international community. A consequence of Sunni alienation in
Iraq was ISIS; the Syrian refugees present risks far more perilous, as millions
of people without a future, a territory, an anchor are circulating among
fragile countries already at their limits in coping with the present situation.
That the international community – starting with
Europe, the United States, the Arab countries, and Russia – has been less than
useless with regard to the Syrian refugees is self-evident. Nor have they taken
any measures against those exacerbating the refugees’ terrible predicament,
namely the Syrian regime and Iran. But the problem will not go away; it will
only get worse for everyone. It’s past time for the world to wake up.
Michael Young is opinion editor of The Daily Star.
Source:
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Columnist/2015/Feb-19/287939-the-region-crumbles-and-lebanon-trembles.ashx#sthash.sTNK4BEf.dpuf
URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-politics/the-region-crumbles-lebanon-trembles/d/101610