Should Lebanon Fear the ‘New Syria’?

People wait with their belongings at the Al-Masnaa crossing as they prepare to return to Syria, on the Lebanese-Syrian border, Lebanon, 11 December 2024. (EPA)
People wait with their belongings at the Al-Masnaa crossing as they prepare to return to Syria, on the Lebanese-Syrian border, Lebanon, 11 December 2024. (EPA)
TT

Should Lebanon Fear the ‘New Syria’?

People wait with their belongings at the Al-Masnaa crossing as they prepare to return to Syria, on the Lebanese-Syrian border, Lebanon, 11 December 2024. (EPA)
People wait with their belongings at the Al-Masnaa crossing as they prepare to return to Syria, on the Lebanese-Syrian border, Lebanon, 11 December 2024. (EPA)

Celebration may have swept Lebanon over the collapse of President Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria given its decades of brutal hegemony over its smaller neighbor, but some Lebanese officials have warned of imminent dangers should extremists assume rule in Damascus.

Head of the Free Patriotic Movement MP Gebran Bassil spoke of an “existential concern among all segments that fear the Islamist groups that are now in control in Syria.”

He questioned the assurances from the groups, recalling how they had occupied some eastern Lebanese regions in recent years, which could force Lebanon into taking a defensive position.

Bassil and others fear a repeat of the 2014 attacks by ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front against the eastern Lebanese border. The groups had attacked the border town of Arsal, killing soldiers and civilians, and occupying regions across the border with Syria.

Lebanese security agencies have intensified measures along the border to prevent a reoccurrence of such an attack, which seems pressing given the presence of hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees throughout Lebanon.

FPM deputy leader Dr. Naji Hayek stressed that as long as the Syrians “don’t meddle in the affairs of our country, then they are free to choose what they want.”

He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “We wish the Syrian people well and hope the new regime will meet the aspirations of the people, who alone can shape the form of their government.”

“Our one fear is meddling in Lebanon’s affairs,” he added.

He hoped democracy would prevail in Syria, warning against totalitarianism. “We did not agree on the form of the previous regime and hope the new one will be better,” he remarked.

Member of the Strong Republic bloc MP Ghada Ayoub said she was not surprised with Bassil’s comments, saying that the regime in Syria was not the only thing that fell, “but so have the masks of Lebanese officials, including Bassil, who were banking on the survival of this regime.”

Bassil lost an ally in Assad and an integral part of the “Axis of Resistance”, which the FPM struck an understanding with in 2006 that allowed then FPM leader Michel Aoun to become president of Lebanon, she told Asharq Al-Awsat.

The Strong Republic bloc positively views the change in Syria, she stressed, saying the former regime was “hostile to Lebanon for 50 years.”

“It believed that Lebanon should be annexed to Syria and that decisions should be taken from Damascus, not Beirut. We mustn't forget all the wars it waged in Lebanon and against the Lebanese people, as well as the crimes, assassinations and arrests that it carried out,” she went on to say.

“The Assad regime also allowed Syria to become a passage for Iranian militias that meddled with Lebanon’s fate and allowed Iran to seize control of Lebanon,” Ayoub added.

“So, a new phase has started in Syria with the collapse of the regime. We must congratulate the Syrian people on their newfound freedom,” she stressed.

“Lebanon wants to build normal relations with Syria based on respect for each other’s sovereignty, away from Assad’s old slogan of ‘one people in two countries’,” she stated.

Islamist movements and terrorist affairs expert Ahmed al-Ayyoubi said Lebanon has nothing to fear from the “new Syria.”

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that the extremist threat comes from the remaining ISIS cells, which the ousted regime and Iran sought to exploit and that they may exploit against the alliance of revolutionaries in Damascus.

He said that Damascus’ new rulers have obstacles to overcome, but extremism is not one of them.

He stressed the need to always focus on preserving freedoms and building a just civilian state.

Moreover, Ayyoubi explained that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham was not the sole component of the victorious factions in Syria. Rather, they are formed of various diverse groups that will be represented in the expected transitional council.

Furthermore, he noted that Iran has sought to pin the label of terrorism on Sunni groups to present itself and its militias as a leader of an anti-terrorism axis.

The reality is far from the truth, Ayyoubi added, saying that the Assad regime “was harboring the most extremist and terrorist groups, and they are Hezbollah and the Shiite militias that are aligned with Iran.”

On December 6, two days before the ouster of the regime, the armed Syrian factions addressed the Lebanese people to reassure them that they were hoping to establish “diplomatic ties with them that achieve mutual interests.”



Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
TT

Three Scenarios for Russia’s Military Presence in Syria

Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin inspecting his troops at Hmeimim Airbase in Latakia on December 12, 2017 (Sputnik/AP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday he would meet former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who fled to Russia after his regime fell in Damascus. But what will Putin say to his former ally? And how might their first exchange unfold, given Russia’s role in helping Assad escape on a chaotic night?

The Kremlin, known for staging Putin’s meetings with precision, might opt to limit media coverage this time. Putin could be seen sitting at a small table with Assad, now on asylum

in Moscow, in a soundless scene—one that leaves little room for formal pleasantries.

Why has Putin announced plans to meet Assad? Is it to reprimand him? Many in Russia believe Assad’s stubbornness has hurt Moscow’s efforts, threatened its gains in Syria, and could eventually risk its key military presence there.

As details remain unclear, Russian experts are racing to analyze developments in Syria and outline scenarios for the next phase.

Some Russian experts have painted grim scenarios. A member of the prestigious Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy warned of potential risks, including a prolonged conflict with civil war elements, a humanitarian catastrophe with millions of refugees, escalating migration in Europe, and rising tensions among nations like Israel, the US, and Iran.

He also predicted a new wave of international terrorism that could reach far beyond the region.

Other experts echoed this pessimism. One posted an image of a Syrian dissident stepping on a statue of Assad’s father, warning that “this is just the beginning.” Another blamed the crisis on the “Obama curse,” citing the West’s interference, while a third shared a bleak analysis titled, “We Must Pray for Syria.”

So far, Russian media and think tanks have avoided any optimistic outlooks for Syria’s future.

Experts, who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat, believe Moscow may be preparing to handle one of three possible scenarios in Syria.

The first, most favorable for Russia’s interests, involves Moscow reaching an agreement with the new Syrian authorities to maintain its military presence for a limited period.

This could mean replacing the current 49-year agreements with a five-year deal to facilitate a gradual Russian withdrawal. Such an arrangement could help the new leadership in Syria manage Western pressure to cut ties with Moscow.

The second scenario envisions Russia giving up its airbase in Hmeimim while retaining a significant presence in Tartus. This would mirror agreements from 1972, which allowed Russian naval vessels to use the Tartus logistics center in the Mediterranean. This compromise would preserve Russia’s interests while reducing Western pressure on Damascus.

The third scenario involves a full Russian withdrawal from both bases, with Moscow later seeking agreements for shared use of air and sea ports. Such agreements, similar to those Russia has signed with other countries, are less likely to provoke Western opposition.

Regardless of the outcome, the Kremlin has yet to develop a clear strategy for dealing with the emerging situation in Syria.

Key questions remain, including how to curb Iran’s regional influence, manage Türkiye and Israel’s growing roles in Syria, and establish a new regional balance that secures Moscow’s minimum interests.