Exclusive: UN Shields Lebanon from Instability, Economic Deterioration

UNIFIL peacekeepers. File photo
UNIFIL peacekeepers. File photo
TT
20

Exclusive: UN Shields Lebanon from Instability, Economic Deterioration

UNIFIL peacekeepers. File photo
UNIFIL peacekeepers. File photo

The United Nations raises a security, economic, political and diplomatic umbrella over Lebanon – a country suffering from economic deterioration, security threats on the southern border, and tensions of political alignments.
 
With 26 offices in Lebanon, and other Beirut-based organizations, the UN spends more than $1 billion a year in the form of aid pumped into the Lebanese market.
 
This international diplomatic presence is primarily a lever for Lebanese affairs in global forums and has gained momentum strength amid a determination by the international community to protect Lebanon’s stability at various levels.

The country hosts tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees and more than a million displaced Syrians. It is also characterized by its pluralistic model of government, which is necessary to maintain, despite its fragility.
 
Based on the factors listed above, Lebanon enjoys a special international attention, and reportedly receives one of the highest rates of UN aid in the region, which gives it some economic immunity.
 
There are more than 26 UN offices that carry out diplomatic and service missions, led by the Office of the Special Coordinator of the UN Secretary-General in Lebanon. Entities include the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and many others.

The UN Resident Coordinator, Philippe Lazzarini, heads the United Nations team in the country. But the UN offices certainly do not include the UN Truce Supervision Force (UNTSO), the role of which is not confined to Lebanon.
 
In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Lazzarini noted that the United Nations has developed during the past three years the so-called full approach to Lebanon.

“Our contribution to Lebanon will be to provide support to maintain stability and help in dealing with the impact of regional crises,” he said.
 
The UN approach initially focused on peace and security. To that end, the UNIFIL in the south plays an important role in maintaining stability on the southern border. UN contributions also focus on other pillars called the “pillars of stability” which address issues of governance, the rule of law and human rights, and support municipal or parliamentary elections.
 
The third pillar is represented by a socio-economic approach, divided into two parts. The first is to help the country mitigate the impact of the Syrian crisis, which means direct support for Syrian refugees and for host communities. The second is to assist the government in addressing existing reform programs in order to obtain a more favorable environment for economic activities.
 
UN figures show that there are more than 2,700 employees working within UN agencies in the country, 80 percent of whom are Lebanese, and 20 percent foreign nationals. These figures do not include the more than 10,500 UNIFIL peacekeepers in the south. The staff budget is part of the overall assistance provided by the United Nations to Lebanon.
 
Since 2015, the UN has spent an average of $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion a year in Lebanon. About $1 billion is spent through UN agencies and the rest through other partners and organizations in the country.

This aid represents an international shield for Lebanon’s economic stability. According to Lazzarini, this contribution certainly helped the country, although it did not address all the existing problems. Aid cannot resolve all the political, economic, social and security problems because most of the assistance is of a humanitarian nature at present.
 
“If you compare Lebanon with many other countries in the world, you will find that over the past four years, the country topped the recipients of humanitarian or international aid, because the volume of contributions exceeds $1 billion per year, excluding support for the Lebanese Armed Forces, Internal Security Forces, and the annual budget of UNIFIL,” the UN Resident Coordinator said.
 
“It is true that we have not compensated for the slow growth of the economy, but we have contributed to preventing its further decline; because a billion dollars and more, injected into the economy, helps reduce the burden,” he remarked.
 
The UN official believes that the organization’s work has also contributed to maintaining some stability, but without keeping Lebanon out of danger.

However, Lazzarini asserts that the country “is still outside the danger zone, and has shown its ability in the last eight years not to fall into it.”



What Do ‘Expert Level’ Talks Signal for the Progress of the Iran-US Nuclear Negotiations? 

US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi, left, meet at a hotel in Vienna, July 9, 2015. (Carlos Barria/Pool Photo via AP, File)
US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi, left, meet at a hotel in Vienna, July 9, 2015. (Carlos Barria/Pool Photo via AP, File)
TT
20

What Do ‘Expert Level’ Talks Signal for the Progress of the Iran-US Nuclear Negotiations? 

US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi, left, meet at a hotel in Vienna, July 9, 2015. (Carlos Barria/Pool Photo via AP, File)
US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi, left, meet at a hotel in Vienna, July 9, 2015. (Carlos Barria/Pool Photo via AP, File)

Negotiations between Iran and the United States over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program will move Wednesday to what's known as the “expert level” — a sign analysts say shows that the talks are moving forward rapidly.

However, experts not involved in the talks who spoke with The Associated Press warn that this doesn't necessarily signal a deal is imminent. Instead, it means that the talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff haven't broken down at what likely is the top-level trade — Tehran limiting its atomic program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions.

“Agreeing to technical talks suggests both sides are expressing pragmatic, realistic objectives for the negotiations and want to explore the details,” said Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association who long has studied Iran's nuclear program.

“If Witkoff was making maximalist demands during his talks with Araghchi, such as dismantlement of the enrichment program, Iran would have no incentive to meet at the technical level.”

That technical level, however, remains filled with possible landmines. Just how much enrichment by Iran would be comfortable for the United States? What about Tehran's ballistic missile program, which US President Donald Trump first cited in pulling America unilaterally out of the accord in 2018? Which sanctions could be lifted and which would be remain in place on Tehran?

“The most important determinant of expert talks’ value lies in whether there is a political commitment to do something and experts just need to figure out what,” said Richard Nephew, an adjunct fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who worked on Iran sanctions while at the US State Department during negotiations over what became the 2015 nuclear deal.

“If the experts also have to discuss big concepts, without political agreement, it can just result in spun wheels.”

Experts and the 2015 nuclear deal

The 2015 nuclear deal saw senior experts involved in both sides of the deal. For the US under President Barack Obama, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz reached an understanding working with Ali Akbar Salehi, then the leader of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. Both men's technical background proved key to nailing down the specifics of the deal.

Under the 2015 agreement, Iran agreed to enrich uranium only to 3.67% purity and keep a stockpile of only 300 kilograms (661 pounds). Today, Iran enriches some uranium up to 60% purity — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. The last report by the International Atomic Energy Agency put Iran's overall uranium stockpile in February at 8,294.4 kilograms (18,286 pounds).

The deal also limited the types of centrifuges Iran could spin, further slowing Tehran's ability to rush for a bomb, if it chose to do so. It also set out the provisions of how and when sanctions would be lifted, as well as time limits for the accord itself.

Reaching limits, relief and timelines require the knowledge of experts, analysts say.

“A nonproliferation agreement is meaningless if it cannot be effectively implemented and verified,” Davenport said. “The United States needs a strong technical team to negotiate the detailed restrictions and intrusive monitoring that will be necessary to ensure any move by Iran toward nuclear weapons is quickly detected and there is sufficient time to respond.”

It remains unclear who the two sides will be sending for those negotiations.

Hiccups already heard in these negotiations

Both the Americans and the Iranians have been tightlipped over exactly what's been discussed so far, though both sides have expressed optimism about the pace. However, there has been one noticeable dispute stemming from comments Witkoff made in a television interview, suggesting Tehran could be able to enrich up to 3.67% purity. However, analysts noted that was the level set by the 2015 deal under Obama.

Witkoff hours later issued a statement suggesting that comparison struck a nerve: “A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal.”

“Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program,” Witkoff added.

Araghchi responded by warning that Iran must be able to enrich.

"The core issue of enrichment itself is not negotiable,” he said.

Despite that, experts who spoke to the AP said they remained positive about the talks' trajectory so far.

“Although still early stages, I’m encouraged so far,” said Alan Eyre, a former US diplomat once involved in past nuclear negotiations with Tehran. “The pace of negotiations — to include starting expert level meetings this Wednesday — is good.”

He added that so far, there didn't appear to be any “mutually exclusive red lines” for the talks as well — signaling there likely wasn't immediately any roadblocks to reaching a deal.

Nephew similarly described reaching the expert level as a “positive sign.” However, he cautioned that the hard work potentially was just beginning for the negotiations.

“They imply the need to get into real details, to discuss concepts that senior (officials) might not understand and to answer questions. I also think too much can be read into them starting,” Nephew said. “Expert talks can sometimes be a fudge for seniors to avoid working on tough issues — ‘let’s have experts discuss it while we move on to other things’ — or to sidestep big political decisions."

Corey Hinderstein, the vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former US government nuclear expert, described herself as feeling “cautious optimism” over the expert talks beginning.

“Heads of delegation are responsible for setting strategic goals and defining success,” she said. “But if there is a deal to be made, the technical experts are the ones who will get it done.”