Lebanon plagued by political and economic backwardness

A horrific explosion in Beirut that claimed at least 100 lives and injured more than 4000 persons on Tuesday ought to have triggered in the minds of more experienced observers of Middle Eastern politics nightmarish memories of the torment of the Lebanon of the seventies and eighties. At the time of this writing the Labanese authorities are in an effort to unravel all aspects of this explosion at an ammonium nitrate dump in Beirut.

Explosions of the magnitude of that which was witnessed on Tuesday was almost commonplace in Lebanon in the seventies and eighties decades and one would not be exaggerating by stating that sensitive minds everywhere were traumatized by Lebanon’s suffering in those times, which was born of a long-running civil war. Car bombs in particular featured very prominently in the war and were used very devastatingly by the numerous parties to the conflict. Most often than not, Lebanon provided newspapers with the headlines they needed on a daily basis.

Many Sri Lankans could identify with Lebanon’s civilians of the decades in question because the eighties in particular in Sri Lanka witnessed some of the most mind-numbing and heart-rending atrocities the LTTE happened to commit during its war against the Sri Lankan state. So much so, the endemic conflict and violence in Sri Lanka in those years came to be referred to as the ‘Lebanonization of Sri Lanka’. Lebanon was the benchmark in civil war-generated blood-letting and implosive intra-state conflict.

While the world awaits the results of the probe undertaken by the Lebanese authorities into the recent blast in Beirut, the commentator cannot escape the impression that Lebanon has not come very far from those times of endemic bloodshed and violence of the seventies and eighties, in terms of democratic development and equitable economic growth. In fact, both these dimensions are closely interlinked and are very marked in Lebanon’s case.

It is not implied when this observation is made that Sri Lanka, meanwhile, has traversed very far on the democratic and equitable growth fronts. Both countries illustrate crippling shortcomings in development but an elaborate discussion of Sri Lanka does not come within the scope of this column.

The unfortunate feature in Lebanon’s political system is that it is yet to outgrow its identity-based or sectarian nature. In a sense, political power is shared at the centre among the country’s main religious communities but observers are quick to point out that those at the head of their communities serve only their fellow religionists in the main. In short, there is no sharing of the country’s wealth and assets on an equitable basis among the main religious and cultural groups. There is then, a yawning democratic and developmental deficit in the country.

Lebanon accords official recognition to 18 religious communities. That is, four Muslim, 12 Christian, the Druze sect and Judaism. Traditionally, the three foremost political positions in Lebanon which are, the presidency, the Speaker of parliament and the prime minister, have been occupied by members of the three largest communities – the Maronite Christians, the Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims.

While secularism is considered a cornerstone of democracy, it is clear that Lebanon does not qualify to be seen as a full-blown democracy on account of its entrenched and legitimized religious cleavages. Moreover, as observed, the tendency among the heads of the relevant sects to serve mainly their communities prevents the country’s wealth from even trickling-down to the needy with a measure of equity.

That equitable development is a key issue in Lebanon is dramatized by the currently unfolding and widespread public protests against the country’s ruling strata. Protesters, who include schoolchildren, are making no bones about the fact that the ruling class must ‘go’, on account of the unconscionable way in which they have fattened themselves at the expense of the needy classes. Meanwhile, corruption in the country is reaching scandalous levels and this too is in the eye of the Lebanese storm. For example, Lebanon is ranked 137th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2019 Corruption Perceptions Index.

The economic crisis has been compounded by COVID-19 and its debilitating effects. Tens of thousands of people have been pushed into poverty and the crisis has triggered the largest anti-government protests, some reports said. At the height of such protests late last year, then Prime Minister Saad Hariri and his ‘unity government’ were compelled to resign. Present Prime Minister Hassan Diab is quoted as commenting amid the pandemic in the ‘Washington Post’ that, ‘Many Lebanese have already stopped buying meat, fruits and vegetables, and may soon find it difficult to afford even bread.’

The problems facing Lebanon have aggravated over the years by continued external interference in her internal politics. For instance, Syria is being seen as a principal influencer of political developments in Lebanon. In decades past, Syria was seen as having a hand in the installation and sustaining of Lebanese governments. Likewise, Iran is considered as wielding equal influence in Lebanon’s politics through the Hezbollah group, which is of the Shiite persuasion. It should not come as a surprise if an external ‘hand’ comes to be seen as having ignited the recent Beirut devastation.

The fact that a verdict is due by an international tribunal in the trial over the 2005 killing of former Lebanese Premier Rafik Hariri lends some credence to the above line of thinking on a foreign ‘hand’. Moreover, Lebanon should be seen as being at the heart of the Middle East problem. Among other regional players, Israel too views developments in Lebanon with intense concern. After all, Lebanon is strategically located and it will be in Israel’s interests to ensure that developments that are inimical to her security concerns do not occur in Lebanon.

Thus, there is a multitude of internal and external factors that stand in the way of Lebanon achieving even a measure of stability and peace. Much will depend also on how empathetically the big powers respond to Lebanon and her issues. Saving the lives of ‘ordinary citizens’ must come to be seen as a predominant concern by all relevant actors, including the big powers.