Like much of the Arab region, Lebanon is currently facing grave dangers. For many years, it has been living with the consequences of a conflict waged from its own territory between the “party of the Iranian axis” based within it and its opponents, entirely separate from the state of “Greater Lebanon,” its institutions, and its will, regardless of what it may or may not decide. This has played a decisive role in shattering what was once known as the “Switzerland of the East,” leading to its economic, financial, and political collapse, the corruption of its administrations, the emigration of its elites across the world, and repeatedly preventing its recovery. It has also resulted in repeated Israeli occupations of the South, turning Lebanon into something resembling a failed state, ranking near the bottom among nations in many fields in which it once excelled.
There are, of course, many other reasons for this collapse. However, it is equally certain that no country can function when there exist on its territory two states, two armies, two strategies, two economies, two financial systems, two systems of justice, and two educational systems, all profoundly at odds with one another, under a dense cloud of rhetoric and slogans meant to obscure reality.
At present, however, something even more dangerous is emerging: extreme violence in public discourse across media and social networks. Individuals openly unleash everything they carry within them, from hatred to fear, amid overt or implicit collective cheering. There is no room for understanding, and the atmosphere points to the risk of imminent civil wars. Perhaps the most urgent need today is intervention by the United Nations to deploy military forces from neutral countries, both Arab and international, to prevent the outbreak of violence.
In the meantime, there is a powerful illuminating light that can correct perception, calm inflamed emotions, and attempt to restore balance: the light of modern Lebanese history. The deeper one sinks into a tragic present, the narrower one’s vision becomes and the more intense one’s rigidity and fanaticism grow. Conversely, the more one draws on memory, “the sun of the soul,” and situates the present within the course of history, the more one calms down and gains the capacity for understanding and empathy. This applies to societies as much as to individuals.
The first lesson offered by the light of Lebanese history is that what is happening today, despite its gravity, is neither new nor unique. It is a repetition, in different forms, of conditions this country has experienced since the emergence of its first political entity 165 years ago, and which it may well experience again in the future. The second lesson, which is key to understanding everything, is that there has always been an ongoing struggle on this land between two major and opposing projects: the Lebanese project and the regional project in Lebanon.
The contingencies of nature, geography, location, identity, and the distinct culture of Mount Lebanon’s society, later extended to the regions integrated into a single entity, created a yearning for a way of life different from that prevailing in its surroundings: first under Ottoman rule, then under pan-Arab Baathist and Nasserist frameworks, later under Syrian Assadist influence, and finally under Khomeinist Iran. The Lebanese project is characterized by the pursuit of freedom, pluralism, interaction, openness to modernity and the world, engagement with knowledge and critical reason, and the quest for a certain quality of life.
Opposed to this stands the regional project in Lebanon, which persistently seeks to erase this specificity and reintegrate Lebanon into the broader authoritarian system.
Before the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948, the central slogan of the regional project was to overthrow the Lebanese entity in pursuit of Ottoman unity, then Syrian unity, and later the unity of the nation under the leadership of the Iranian Supreme Jurist. After the establishment of Israel, the regional project added another major slogan: the liberation of Palestine from Lebanese territory. Naturally, this can only be pursued through complete control over the state that carries the Lebanese project or, failing that, by eliminating it altogether. This is the reality Lebanon has endured, suffering greatly from it, without weakening Israel over time and, in fact, contributing to its strengthening.
To ease the burden of the present and calm inflamed minds, it is important to note that the current conflict between the “party of the Iranian axis” and the “state of the Lebanese project” is not the most dangerous episode in this long tragic trajectory. It is far less severe and bloody than the turning points of 1860, 1915–1918, and 1975–1990, which claimed hundreds of thousands of lives amid immense suffering. Those immersed in the present must recognize that the past was no more merciful, and yet it was overcome.
