While it is undoubtedly true that serious economic and financial reforms need to be introduced to solve Lebanon’s deepening crisis, it is far from being the only solution the country needs. What Lebanon lacks, first and foremost, is the political will to launch the necessary reforms in order to promote good governance, without which plans would only bring temporary relief instead of solving the core of the problem.
Since 2001 and the Paris 1 conference, experts and friends of Lebanon unanimously agreed on “the compelling necessity to introduce reforms in order to improve State governance”. Things were said – sometimes alluded to – courteously, but Lebanese leaders reneged their responsibility and established no roadmap beyond dealing with the financial aspect.
Reforms ought to have been made decades ago, since the end of the so-called civil war. All non-State armed forces should have been dismantled. However, the decision-makers – the Syrian regime at first, followed by Hezbollah – and their accomplices in the ruling class chose to keep the status quo.
An Actor in Regional Conflicts
Actually, the financial and economic problems are the product of bad politics. Lebanese leaders were happy striking regional alliances that killed all hopes of effective governance under the Rule of Law. Rampant corruption and cronyism benefited certain political groups which in return turned a blind eye on violations of national sovereign and the usurping of political decisions.
Regionally, since 2011 at the very least, Lebanon became a player in regional conflicts. Its refusal to implement UN resolutions and to demarcate its borders as well as its bid to protect non-state armies, put the country at odds with the international community. The border with Israel was kept stable by UNIFIL (UN Interim Force in South Lebanon) after many wars, while some made sure the border with Syria stayed porous enough to allow free circulation of weapons and fighters, and the smuggling of State-subsidized goods. It was the State that paid the cost, siphoning money from the Central Bank’s reserves and draining Lebanese depositors’ accounts.
The situation then spiraled into the most significant financial and economic crisis in Lebanon’s history. Today, Lebanon needs to restructure its finances and regenerate its economy. To achieve that, however, trust has to be regained. Lebanon must again inspire confidence to its citizens, expatriates, investors, friendly States, and the international monetary institutions that would put the country back on track. But there will be no trust without good governance. Additionally, sovereignty needs to be restored and the country must be sheltered from surrounding conflicts. No reforms can be implemented without these pillars.
The 15-year-long Civil War in Lebanon ended with the 1989 Taif Agreement. A large part of the agreement was inculcated in the Lebanese Constitution. Although the accord’s “spirit” (that of coexistence) is still prevalent among the people, the document contains many loopholes that need to be addressed.
Implementing the Taif Agreement
While some believe that “we are going through a regime crisis” and that “Taif resulted in a dysfunctional regime, it is still regarded as the basis of a popular contract. Building on “the large consensus around Taif” is a good idea especially that reviewing the entire pact and changing the regime is not feasible at the moment. So, let us implement the Taif Agreement in its entirety and see later if it needs to be amended or replaced.
Implementation, however, should focus on a major aspect, namely, prioritizing citizenship over sectarian identity. Such approach entails administrative decentralization to bring citizens closer to governance, the creation of a senate to reassure the different communities, and the implementation of Article 95 of the Constitution, which stipulates the creation of a mechanism to end political sectarianism.
Disregarding this aspect of the Taif Agreement has undermined national consensus deeply. Its aim was to adjust relations between communities and promote accountability. That’s why it definitely needs to be addressed.
UN Resolutions
Rebuilding trust in the State is done through regulation, auditing, and an independent judicial system. A lot has been said in that sense, but nothing was done. Governments have presented lists of potential reforms but did nothing to implement them. A potential solution can only be viable if the government acts in a sovereign State that enforces the Rule of Law and has the monopoly of coercive power. In the case of Lebanon, this can be done by implementing UN Resolutions 1559, 1701, and 1680.
The first Resolution provides for disarming all militias; Hezbollah must commit. The other two are about demarcating the borders with Lebanon’s neighboring countries, and giving the Lebanese Army – the only legal armed forces – full control over the border. A first step was taken in that direction last October, when the maritime demarcation agreement was signed with Israel. More such work should be done.
Lastly, Lebanon must find stability by dissociating itself from regional conflicts. The country paid a heavy price when its factions took part in wars, in 1860, in 1958, in 1969, in 1975 and in the 80’s, in addition to the Syrian war, and the Iranian nuclear conflict. This positive neutrality has been in its favor during the Mutasarifia era under the Ottoman Empire, between 1861 and 1915. Back then, it knew stability in a region in turmoil.
The winning three-fold recipe
Sovereignty and international legitimacy, good governance and the rule of law, and positive neutrality is the winning recipe.
Can it be put in place?
I would like to think that it can be done, here’s why:
First, the country’s leaders no longer have the economic and financial means to keep Lebanon afloat. The State apparatus is disintegrating, the institutions are losing ground, several banks are insolvent, and the State itself is on the verge of collapse. The entire population – that includes the leaders’ followers – is suffering greatly.
Second, results of the 2022 general election indicated that the majority of the Lebanese stands firmly against the political decisions taken since 2011, when Hezbollah and its allies took over the reins of power. Not one party now holds the majority in Parliament. Blocs must agree on reforms, or resort to force. But in a country like Lebanon, it is highly improbable that one group can force a large part of the population into submission.
Third and last, should Lebanon follow the path of “Somalization”, it would bring instability to the East Mediterranean region and prompt international powers to intervene to ensure that serious reforms are implemented.
Without reform and robust political decision-making, the vicious cycle will remain and nothing will change… Politics would prevail over finance and the economy.