Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah speaks via a video link during a ceremony marking Prophet Muhammad’s birthday, in the southern of Beirut, Lebanon, October 2, 2023 (AP)
In a speech commemorating the birthday of Prophet Mohammad, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah discussed several issues including Syrian displacement to Lebanon and Lebanon’s border with occupied Palestine, among other important issues.
The United States holds the responsibility for the displacement of Syrian citizens, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said during a speech commemorating the birthday of Prophet Muhammad.
The Resistance leader called on officials to implement a unified national plan of action which they could present to the international community and later to the caretaker government, governmental institutions, the Lebanese Army, and Lebanese security forces, in order to resolve the crisis resulting from the displacement of Syrians to Lebanon.
He added that Lebanese political parties believe that the displacement of Syrians to Lebanon has become an economic, security, and demographic threat to Lebanon.
However, the leader did stress that the Lebanese people must treat displaced Syrians within the framework of laws and morals and not be driven into waves of hostility against them.
The leader said that addressing the issues resulting from the US’ role in Syria will greatly alleviate the burdens off Lebanon. Sayyed Nasrallah said the US created both security and economic pressures on the Syrian people forcing them out of the country.
In particular, the Ceasar Act has put great pressure on both Syria and Lebanon, as Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that for the latter to survive, the “Ceasar must be lifted.”
He emphasized that if the United States were to eliminate its sanctions on Syria, hundreds of thousands of displaced Syrians would return to their country.
Furthermore, Hezbollah’s Secretary-General called on officials to produce statistics on Syrians in Lebanon, which the country has lacked since the beginning of the war on Syria in 2011. He also stressed the need to differentiate between those displaced and those who have been integrated into the country’s workforce.
Sayyed Nasrallah touched on the wave of Syrian migration to Europe through Lebanon, warning that the European Union would eagerly meet any Lebanese demands on the issue to prevent a further influx of refugees.
Finally, regarding this matter, the Resistance leader urged security forces to dismantle people smuggling networks in the country.
Addressing the issue of Lebanon setting its borders in stone, Sayyed Nasrallah underlined that the usage of the term “demarcating Lebanon’s land borders with occupied Palestine” is inaccurate because the borders were already demarcated.
Any mediation regarding the issue, if it occurs, will focus on the northern Ghajar region due to the issue of the two tents, Sayyed Nasrallah said.
Tensions along the occupied Palestinian-Lebanese border have been escalating for several months. The issue of tents erected by Hezbollah within Lebanese territories in the Shebaa Farms region continues to generate tension within Israeli security and military establishments, despite Hezbollah’s recent dismantling of one of the tents.
Tensions have recently risen between Lebanon and the Israeli occupation after the latter’s violations in the northern part of Al-Ghajar — a town at the border with Occupied Palestine — represented in the construction of a barbed wire fence and a concrete wall around the entire town.
Hezbollah in June set up two tents in the Lebanese Shebaa Farms. Commenting on the tents and in response to a question about what he would have done were he the current Israeli occupation Chief of Staff, Halutz indicated that three months have passed since the tents were set up, adding that calling for action now could lead the situation to spiral out of control. While he stressed that demarcation is the responsibility of the state, “it accepts mediation and negotiations. We are not concerned with acceptance or rejection,” suggesting that any mediation would focus on the northern Ghajar region.
Sayyed Nasrallah stressed the separation between the land border issue and the presidential issue.
“Some believe that we may make concessions on the land borders, that is, give up land, in order to gain support for our candidate, former Minister Suleiman Franjieh,” he said.
“This has no realistic basis.” Likewise, Sayyed Nasrallah said that some people link the land borders and the Iran nuclear deal, but “this has not been brought up on the Iranian-US negotiating table previously.”
“We do not compromise when it comes to our maritime or land rights,” he said. “Any step toward liberation will be taken in close cooperation between the state and the Resistance.”
Speaking separately of Lebanon’s gas blocks, Sayyed Nasrallah said: “All indicators are positive regarding Block 9, which is confirmed by the existing consortium’s bidding on Blocks 8 and 10.”
Going back to the presidential issue, Sayyed Nasrallah affirmed that “there was an opportunity in the dialogue that President Berri called for talks, but this opportunity was wasted by political pettiness.”
On the Prophet’s birthday
The leader commended “the great, magnificent, and beautiful Yemeni celebration of the Prophet’s Birthday, despite the difficult living and security conditions,” that the country is experiencing due to a US-Saudi-led blockade.
He called on Muslims to pay the event more attention, saying that the Prophet’s Birthday is the “greatest day of joy.”
At the same time, he condemned a terrorist bombing of a mosque by extremists in Pakistan during the special Muslim occasion.
He also urged the Arab nation to bear responsibility for the events taking place in Palestine, including the desecration of the al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied al-Quds. Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that if settlers’ incursions into the Muslims’ first Qibla continue, the Mosque’s compound will be divided between Muslims and Jews.
The leader also condemned states that seek to or have normalized relations with “Israel”, saying that they have abounded Palestine and strengthened the occupation by doing so, in what constitutes intolerable action.
“When a country normalizes, it must be condemned… it is an attack on Palestinian land and Islamic and Christian sanctities.”
Soft power weakens nations
On soft power and media warfare, the leader said that these two strategies have proven to be “more effective than military combat in weakening nations, and some countries have withstood military confrontations but lost in the soft and media war.”
Sayyed Nasrallah concluded: “When the Arab and Egyptian armies united and were supported by some countries in the October War, “Israel” trembled; this unity almost achieved a decisive historical victory,” in 1973.
The United States of America decided in 2011 to destroy a politically and economically independent nation just because it does not comply with US administration’s policies in the Middle East.
USA ordered most of the world countries to dispatch terrorists in order to fight the safe civilians and army soldiers in Syria in 2011. Since the military war failed to subdue Syria, the operators in Washington escalated the pressures by passing a law that bans any economic cooperation with Damascus.
As a result of around 13 years of a terrorist war and an economic siege, the Syrian people suffered harsh living conditions deteriorating on a daily basis.
The Syrian laymen found themselves obliged to search for a source of an acceptable income even it costs them to take the risk of crossing the borders illegally and dangerously (via illegitimate boats).
Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan were their main destination before they moved into Europe and other continents.
In the case of Lebanon, the situation was very dramatic since it has been suffering from an unprecedented socioeconomic situation in addition to fragile infrastructure and public services.
Around 2 million Syrian refugees in the 10452-square-kilometer small country with a population of 4 millions makes the Lebanese situation harsher.as the percentage of the Syrian refugees out of the total population is expected to be much higher during the upcoming years.
Thus, the overburdened nation finds itself obliged to seek a solution for this dilemma as the US administration and the European Union have rejected all the proposals to let the refugees back to their homeland.
The Lebanese caretaker government held last Monday a session to discuss the Syrian refugees crisis, assigning the foreign minister, Abdullah Abou Habib, to lead an official delegation to Syria to discuss the issue of the displaced.
After the session, the Minister of Culture Mohammad Al-Mortada published via X platform a post that explains the decisions of the Lebanese government, indicating that Lebanon has got fed up with the NGOs preventing the return of the Syrian refugees.
Al-Mortada warned that such organization would be dissolved, hinting that Lebanon would not be able to prevent boats carrying the Syrian refugees into Europe.
لمن لم يفهم من "المجتمع الدولي"ما تقرّر في جلسة اليوم، خذْ علماً بالاهمّ: ١- اليوم جرى انذار ادواتكم، اي "المنظّمات غير الحكومية" ان لبنان طفح كيله منهم ولن يرضى ان يستمر ارضاً مستباحةً من قبلهم وان عليهم ان يخضعوا للتنسيق والرقابة وإلاّ سيجري سحب العلم والخبر وحلّهم….عجّل… pic.twitter.com/qoeqxSP10S
— القاضي محمد وسام المرتضى وزير الثقافة (@JugeMMourtada) September 11, 2023
Two days later, Abou Habib contacted his Syrian counterpart, Faisal Mekdad. They agreed to hold a meeting between them shortly upon Minister Bou Habib’s return from New York, where he will participate alongside Premier Najib Mikati in the work of the United Nations General Assembly, and will meet there with the Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister, who will represent his country in UN meetings.
Lebanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdallah Bou Habib (photo from archive).
The Syrian Foreign Minister welcomed the visit of Minister Bou Habib and the accompanying delegation to Damascus, expressing his readiness for all cooperation that falls in the interest of the two countries.
The Lebanese Minister of Social Affairs Hector Hajjar told Al-Manar that Europe will recognize that Lebanon will be the transit stage of the Syrian refugees, adding that Lebanon will not be able to provide the displaced with the suitable living conditions.
Hajjar pointed out that the European states, mainly Cyprus, have notified the Lebanese authorities about their worries pertaining the flock of Syrian refugees into Europe illegally by sea or legally through airports.
Lebanese caretaker social affairs minister Hector Hajjar
Lebanon’s caretaker Social Affairs Minister sheds light on human trafficking and border security issues with Syria.
Hector Hajjar, Lebanon’s caretaker Minister of Social Affairs, unveiled concerns regarding human trafficking and border security amid the ongoing Syrian displacement crisis.
Hajjar stressed, in an interview with Al Mayadeen, the urgent need for international cooperation to address the complex challenges faced by Lebanon.
Minister Hajjar asserted, “There are human trafficking gangs and collusion by some security personnel facilitating displacement from Syria to Lebanon.” This revelation underscores the gravity of the situation, as vulnerable Syrians continue to seek refuge in Lebanon.
"There are human trafficking gangs and collusion by some security figures in facilitating the displacement from #Syria to Lebanon… The Lebanese army and the General Security Directorate are making tremendous efforts to prevent the new wave of displacement into the country."
One of the critical issues highlighted by Hajjar is the inadequacy of border security forces. He stated, “We need 40,000 troops to secure the borders with Syria, but currently, we currently have 8,000 available [to carry out the task].”
Furthermore, Hajjar emphasized that Lebanon cannot address these issues unilaterally, emphasizing the necessity of political and security coordination with Syria. He explained, “We cannot manage border affairs on our own; we need political and security coordination with Syria.”
Minister Hajjar also made it clear that Beirut is not in a position to accommodate additional refugees. He stated firmly, “Beirut will not allow the registration of any new refugees in the refugee commission,” citing the country’s inability to bear the burden of a new wave of Syrian displacement.
While acknowledging the enormous efforts being undertaken by the Lebanese army and the General Security Directorate to prevent illegal entry into Lebanon, Hajjar laid the blame for the crisis at the feet of the United States. He noted, “Syria is facing significant economic siege due to the Caesar Act,” holding the US responsible for the new displacement.
"Lebanon is witnessing a new wave of Syrian refugees. #Syria is facing a major economic blockade due to the Caesar Act, and I hold the United States responsible for the new wave of displacement."
In addition to the US, Hajjar called upon the international community to shoulder the responsibility for the repercussions of the Syrian displacement crisis in Lebanon, emphasizing the urgency of the situation.
Hajjar concluded by warning of the severity of the new Syrian displacement issue and reaffirmed the government’s commitment to monitor and address the matter. He also offered advice to Syrian youth, encouraging them to endure the challenges in their homeland, as he pointed to the difficult circumstances faced by both Lebanese citizens and Syrian refugees in Lebanon.
Earlier in the day, the Lebanese army stopped 1,200 Syrian refugees this week aiming to turn them back to their home country after they attempted to illegally cross from Lebanon into Syria.
“As part of the fight against human trafficking and the illegal crossing of land borders, Lebanese army units intercepted 1,200 Syrians trying to illegally cross the Lebanese-Syrian border on different days this week,” the Lebanese army said.
President Bashar al-Assad affirmed that terrorism was the reason behind destruction in Syria, and those who stood by terrorism, intended for war and plotted it, bear the responsiblity, not the ones who have fought against terrorism.
President Assad added in an interview given to Sky News Arabia that during the past years, nearly half a million refugees returned to Syria, but now, the President wonders, how can a refugee return without water, electricity, schools for his children, and without medical treatment, these are the basics of life. This was the reason.
If Syria has been able to avoid the war, President al-Assad said that theoretically, the war could have been avoided if we had submitted to all the demands that were imposed on Syria with various issues, foremost of which was the abandonment of Syrian rights and Syrian interests, so I say, in a theoretical point of view, that because we will not go in this direction, but if we assume that we will go, then this means that we will avoid war, but later, we will pay a much greater price.
About the volume of destruction beacue of terrorism , President Assad said “We did not expect the extent of destruction to be of this volume because we did not know what plots were prepared. We knew that things were being prepared for Syria, and we knew from the beginning of the war that it would be a long war, not an incidental crisis as some thought, but the details, no, no one could expect them.”
“There was terrorism and the State was fighting it, and terrorism was killing, destroying and burning… There is no state, even if it was between two parentheses “bad” that destroys the homeland, so terrorism is the one that caused the destruction. The state’s role, by virtue of the constitution and national custom, is to defend the state,” President al-Assad added.
As for the scenarios which were plotted in the region, President Assad said: We, in Syria, were aware of the scenarios that were put and marketed in the media to create a state of terror, so these scenarios were not in our minds in general, especially since we were engaged in an existential battle. The target was not Gaddafi, it was Libya, and it was not Saddam Hussein, it was Iraq. And the target was not President Bashar, it was Syria.”
President Assad wondered if counter-terrorism is the one that destroyed the country? saying “If we let terrorism, could the State be constructed! This is illogical. So, the one who bears the responsibility is the one who stood by terrorism, not the one who defended against terrorism. The one who bears the responsibility is the one who intended for war, the one who planned the war, and the one who attacked, not the one who was attacked.”
Regarding the impact of the freindly countries on Syria, President Assad added “The friends’ standing by our side had an important impact on the steadfastness of Syria, but friends cannot replace us in the war, in the battle, and in resilience, for the real steadfastness is the steadfastness of the people.”
Responding a question about the return of Syria to the Arab League and the inter-Arab relations, President Assad wondered “Will Syria’s return to the Arab League be formal or something else,” This depends on the nature of Arab-Arab relations, have they changed? I do not think that it has changed in depth. There is an awareness of the volume of the risks that affect us as Arab countries, but it has not reached the stage of developing solutions, as long as there are no solutions to the problems, then the relationship will remain formal.”
As for the file of refugees, President Assad stressed “during the past years, bearly half a million refugees returned to Syria, and none of them was imprisoned. Why did this return stop? It stopped because of the situation of the living conditions. How can a refugee return without water, electricity, schools for his children, and no medical treatment? These are the basics of life. This was the reason.”
Regarding drug trafficking, the President said “If we are the ones seeking as a state to encourage the drug trafficking in Syria; This means that we, as a state, encouraged the terrorists to come to Syria and carry out destruction and killing, because the result is the same… If we put the people between terrorism on the one hand and drugs on the other, then we are destroying society and the country with our own hands, where is our interest.”
“The drug trafficking is present and has not stopped, but when there is war and the weakness of the state, this trade could flourish, and those who bear responsibility in this case are the countries that contributed to creating chaos in Syria, not the Syrian State,” the President added.
About the so-called “Caesar Act”, Presdient al-Assad said it is an obstacle to the improvement of the economy, but “we managed in several ways to overcome this “Act,” the biggest obstacle is the destruction of the infrastructure by terrorists, the image of the war in Syria, which prevents any investor from coming to deal with the Syrian market. The biggest obstacle is also time.”
About the expectations from the Arab side regarding Syria, President Assad said “I can’t predict, I can hope, hope we can build institutions. The problem of the Arabs is that they did not build relations on institutions. Therefore, they did not build institutions, and if we talk about bilateral relations, they are weak for this reason and the collective relationship through the Arab League, because the Arab League did not turn into an institution in the true sense, this is what we see and this is what we hope to be able to overcome.”.
As for “opposition,” President al-Assad commented that “it is the opposition that is made locally, not that one made externally. Locally made means that it has a popular base, a national program, and a national awareness.
As for the Israeli aggression on Syrian territory and who is the targeted, the President said “The truth is that the Syrian army is mainly targeted under the title of the Iranian presence, and it will continue as long as Israel is an enemy, and it will continue as long as we are able to thwart the terrorists’ plans, even partially, because these strikes began when the Syrian army began to achieve victories in the battles it is engaged in, and we take into account that we have not finished from the war yet.”
As for Turkey and the possibility of any meeting with Erdogan, President Assad said “ A word without preconditions for a meeting means without an agenda, without an agenda means without preparation, without preparation means without results, so why do Erdogan and I meet?! We want to reach a clear goal. Our goal is the Turkish withdrawal from the Syrian lands, while Erdogan’s goal is to legitimize the presence of the Turkish occupation in Syria. Therefore, the meeting cannot take place under Erdogan’s conditions.”
Hezbollah’s Syrian Refugees File Official, Nawwar Sehali, called on the caretaker prime minister Najib Mikati to lead a ministerial delegation to Syria in order to discuss with President Bashar Assad the means of coping with the foreign conspiracy pertaining the refugees issue.
The European Parliament passed a resolution that supports the continued presence of the Syrian refugees in Lebanon despite all the Lebanese agonies caused by this crisis.
In an interview with Al-Manar TV, Sehali said that, if the European states are keen on securing the interests of the Syrian refugees, they must host them.
Sehali called on all the Lebanese political forces to take a firm stance against the EU Resolution and stop resorting to the polite diplomacy aimed at securing private interests.
Sehali affirmed that all those who show reluctance in taking this stance will be viewed as a conspirator against Lebanon and all the Lebanese.
Hezbollah official said that Turkey and Jordan will take a firm stance against the Western conspiracy, by dispatching the refugees boats to Europe.
Head of Marada Movement MP Suleiman Franjiyeh stressed that the EU Parliament Resolution violates Lebanon’s sovereignty, calling on the Lebanese authorities to continue exerting serious efforts in order to secure the return of the Syrian refugees to their homeland.
Fadi, a Syrian teenager with curly hair and an acne-covered face, has miraculously survived one of the greatest migrant boat disasters in the modern history of the Mediterranean.
Only 104 people have been rescued from a boat that carried an estimated 750 refugees after it capsized on June 13 in the open sea near the coastal town of Pylos.
Scores of lifeless bodies have been pulled out from the water, and many more have washed ashore. Hundreds are still missing, feared dead, many of whom are women and children, as they huddled on the lower deck of the 30-meter boat.
Fadi survived. A heart-rending photo shows the young Syrian sobbing as he met his older brother, Mohammed, who rushed to the port of Kalamata, Greece, to see him. The two brothers could not embrace, as Fadi was still trapped behind metal gates in a confinement made for the survivors.
The latest boat disaster tells a much bigger story than the sympathetic news headlines attempted to convey. It is a story of war, poverty, inequality and despair.
The identity of those who died at sea gives us clues to the origins of the story. They were Syrians, Palestinians, Afghans and more. These refugees were seeking safety, coveting mere survival.
The sad irony is that the latest episode of this seemingly endless horror took place exactly one week before the United Nations was set to ‘celebrate’ World Refugee Day, held on June 20 of each year.
Most references to this day by the UN, UN-related organizations and international charities around the world seem to emphasize empowerment and positivity. A statement by the UN Refugees Agency (UNHCR) spoke of “honoring the refugees around the globe” and referenced Refugee Day as one that “celebrates the strength and courage” of refugees.
The contradictions of the discourses pertaining to the refugees should be too obvious to miss. But we often do. Too many lavish dinners will be catered in the name of the refugees in many Western capitals and embassies around the world. Diplomats will demand action, and well-paid intellectuals will enunciate the moral and ethical responsibilities of governments and civil societies. Many will clap, and numerous business cards will be exchanged. But little will change.
Over 23,000 refugees have drowned or gone missing while trying to reach European shores between 2014 and 2022. The real number is expected to be much higher as there are no official records of how many people embark on these deadly journeys in the first place. “We have hundreds of records of bodies that are washed up to Mediterranean shores when we don’t know of any known shipwreck,” Julia Black of the International Organization for Migration told the BBC’s Today Program.
The identity of the victims – Syrians, Palestinians, Afghans, Sudanese … – should have been a major clue as to why people take such terrible risks only to reach European countries, where they endure great hardships, including racial discrimination, just to survive.
Yet, we hardly confront the real culprits behind all of this: weapon manufacturers and military interventionists and political meddlers who provoke and/or exacerbate conflicts. These individuals and governments see the Middle East, Africa and the rest of the Global South as mere space for geopolitical rivalries, cheap raw materials and human and economic exploitation.
But when the outcome of such dreadful policies results in the least irritant to the socioeconomic fabrics of Western societies, desperate refugees become villains, to be shunned, ignored, imprisoned, and deported.
In reality, world refugees, estimated at over 100 million, are not ‘celebrated’, but mostly vilified. They are seen as a burden, not an opportunity to confront and fix the underlying problems, old and new, that led to their original displacement.
While visiting Tunisia on June 11, along with far-right Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the President of the European Commission, Ursula Von Der Leyen, was adamant about rebranding the tragedy of refugees as something else entirely.
In their joint statement, the high-ranking European politicians vowed to break “the cynical business model of smuggler(s)” because “it is horrible to see how they (the smugglers) deliberately risk human lives for profit.” Considering that the arms industry is one of Europe’s most thriving business models, one cannot help but pause at the irony of such remarks.
No other collective experiences illustrate Western complicity as that of the Palestinian people. Thousands of them have perished while escaping for their lives from Israel’s horrific wars and sieges. They were dying in large numbers as soon as Zionist militants began the systematic ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1947-48.
Yet, after 75 years of such suffering and pain, western countries continue to do everything in their power to support Israel and disempower – even blame – Palestinians.
Indeed, those who are truly interested in commemorating World Refugee Day ought to fully fathom the protracted Palestinian refugee experience to truly understand where the problem actually lies.
On a recent trip to Turkiye, I met with many Palestinian refugees, mostly from Gaza, whose families were also made refugees by Israel in 1948, and again in 1967. These mostly young people are anxiously awaiting the opportunity to cross the sea into Greece, then to other European countries in search of work.
Mohammed B. told me that he had attempted 9 times to reach Greece. “The last time I was caught. I was severely beaten and left for dead in a dark forest,” he said, “but I will try again.”
Mohammed’s uncle was killed by Israel during the First Intifada; several members of his family died due to the lack of medicine in the besieged Strip, and nearly 35 members of the family, mostly children, live in a three-bedroom house that was bombed by Israel on two separate occasions.
Mohammed, and millions like him, are not the villains. They are the victims.
For World Refugee Day to matter, it must address the root causes of such complex and ongoing problems. Only an honest and deep understanding can serve as a starting point for a meaningful conversation and, hopefully, meaningful actions.
Feature photo | Felipe Dana | AP
Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out’. His other books include ‘My Father was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth’. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.
Syrian President Bashar Assad welcomes Lebanon’s Former President Michel Aoun
Lebanese Former President Michel Aoun visited on Tuesday Syria and met with President Bashar Assad to discuss the mutual ties between the two countries.
The esteemed founder of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) stressed that the Lebanese people adhere to their national unity despite all circumstances, adding that Syria’s prosperity will have positive impact on Lebanon.
He also considered that Syria has overcome the difficult and serious stage thanks to the awareness of its people and their faith in their army and leadership.
Syrian President Bashar Assad welcomes Lebanon’s Former President Michel Aoun
For his part, President Bashar al-Assad saw that Lebanon’s strength lies in its political and economic stability and that the Lebanese people have the potentials to make this stability through dialogue and consensus, and the most significant is by adhering to the principles of not betting on changes.
President al-Assad added “General Aoun played a role in maintaining the fraternal relation between Syria and Lebanon for the interest of the two countries,” expressing his confidence on the Lebanese capability to overcome all the problems and challenges and devote the role of their national and constitutional institutions.
“Syria and Lebanon cannot consider their challenges separately,” President al-Assad went on to say, noting that the Arab-Arab rapprochement that took place recently and was manifested in Arab League Jeddah Summit will positively affect Syria and Lebanon.
Syrian President Bashar Assad welcomes Lebanon’s Former President Michel Aoun
Accompanying Aoun on this notable visit is the ex-minister Pierre Raffoul, while their arrival at the Lebanese-Syrian border was greeted with utmost cordiality by the Syrian Ambassador to Lebanon, Ali Abdul Karim Ali.
Media reports indicated that Aoun’s purposeful visit aims to underscore the “continuation of the relation and the FPM’s strategic alignment.”
It is through this diplomatic endeavor that Aoun intends to elucidate to President Assad that his steadfast refusal to endorse Marada leader Suleiman Franjieh’s election is entirely unrelated to the aforementioned alignment, as the reports have mentioned.
Michel Aoun has an intriguing background that adds depth to his recent visit to Syria. Notably, Aoun’s political journey includes a unique dynamic with Syria. In the 1990s, he found himself in direct opposition to Syrian forces, engaging in military clashes. These confrontations ultimately compelled him to seek exile in France.
However, Aoun’s position towards Syria underwent a transformation during his tenure as President of Lebanon, which spanned from 2016 to 2022. During this period, Aoun adopted a more conciliatory stance, displaying a shift towards friendlier relations with Syria. As part of his approach, he dispatched ministers to Damascus to facilitate discussions and negotiations, particularly focused on addressing the issue of Syrian refugees. Aoun’s aim was to create a conducive environment for the safe return of Syrian refugees to their homeland.
His visit demonstrates the evolution of his political outlook and highlights the importance of fostering continued engagement and cooperation between the FPM and Syria.
It’s worth noting that Speaker of Lebanon’s parliament Nabih Berri called for a session on 14 June to vote for a new president.
Arab reconciliation with Syria is a two-way street, with both sides seeking important concessions from each other. While all solutions can be found within a grand regional compromise, not all Arab states will be willing to challenge Washington’s red lines.
Twelve days after Syria regained its membership in the Arab League, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad addressed the pan-Arab body at its 19 May summit in Jeddah. This was Assad’s first Arab League meeting in 12 years. It was also his first visit to Saudi Arabia since October 2010, making the kingdom the third Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member – after Oman and the UAE – to welcome him for an official visit this year.
His participation at the gathering was a watershed in Damascus’s return to the region’s diplomatic arena and a sign of a collective desire by most Arab governments, with the notable exception of Qatar, to reintegrate Syria into the fold and ends it isolation.
During Assad’s first speech at an Arab League summit since his country’s November 2011 suspension, he lambasted the west and said that “for Syria, its past, present, and future is Arabism.” The Syrian president called for an end to outside interference in Arab countries’ internal affairs. His address centered on the recognition of a new multipolar geopolitical order and highlighted Syria’s reconciliation with various regional governments.
“Today we have an opportunity in a world with several poles as a result of western dominance, which lacks principles, manners, friends, and partners.”
“This Arab League summit is a historic opportunity to address regional issues without foreign interference, which requires us to reposition in the world that is forming today in order for us to play an active role in it as we take advantage of the positive atmosphere following the reconciliations that preceded the summit today.”
Reasserting Arab independence
The Syrian president also told summit attendees that he hopes the event will mark “the beginning of a new phase of Arab action for solidarity among us, for peace in our region, development, and prosperity instead of war and destruction.”
Commenting on Assad’s address, Dr. Joseph A Kechichian, a senior fellow at the King Faisal Centre in Riyadh, tells The Cradle:
“It was ironic that Syrian President Bashar Assad thanked Saudi Arabia for promoting the reconciliation in the region… Still, much of what was discussed in public at Jeddah was superficial, although one assumed that far more substantial conversations occurred behind closed doors.
While embracing his fellow Arabs, Assad lashed out at Turkiye and Israel during his address. Despite Damascus and Ankara’s gradual movement toward reconciliation under Russian auspices, the Syrian president condemned Turkiye’s military deployment into northern Syria and its sponsorship of various anti-government militias.
By citing the “danger of expansionist Ottoman thought” and the Muslim Brotherhood, Assad likely resonated with some attendees whose governments share Syria’s view of the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. He also declared that “there are many issues for which there are not enough words or summits, including the crimes of the Zionist entity [Israel]… against the resisting Palestinians.”
While Assad’s speech carried significant rhetoric and symbolism, the question remains whether Syria’s regained Arab League membership and its warm welcome in Saudi Arabia will deliver the tangible changes the country desperately needs.
Here are five of the most pressing issues facing Syria today, each of which can be solved inter-regionally, if western pressures are held at bay:
Sanctions circumvention
First, with Washington doubling down on its Caesar Act, Damascus will be looking to find Arab partner states to help circumvent or undermine these sanctions, and devise tactics to do so. Thus far, the US’s crippling sanctions on Syria have deterred the wealthier GCC states from investing in the country’s reconstruction and redevelopment.
Camille Otrakji, a Damascus-born, Montreal-based Syria specialist, tells The Cradle that, presently, “Arab states find themselves benefiting from the temporary [sanctions] respite provided by the 180-day general license issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)” in response to the devastating 6 February earthquake.
“Additionally, these states have forged an understanding with the Biden administration, recognizing that engagement with Syria can yield mutually advantageous outcomes…Nevertheless, there exist indirect avenues through which the Arabs can extend support to the Syrian government without transgressing the boundaries of existing sanctions.”
The Syrian leadership is trying to loosen the US sanctions noose with help from fellow Arab League members, particularly those such as the UAE which have considerable clout in Washington. Arab states also have options for doing business with Syria in ways that could escape the US Treasury Department’s radar – in local currencies, for instance.
These include going through the Russians and Iranians or “construct[ing] barter-like relationships and buy[ing] into long-term shares of things that are constructed in the form of direct transfers of regional currencies,” as Dr. Hussein Ibish, a senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington, DC, recently told CNN.
Regardless of how US President Joe Biden or his eventual successor approach Syria and the Caesar Act, officials in Damascus may conclude that time is on their side, even if patience is necessary. The Syrian government is banking on a new, less west-centric, and more multipolar world order emerging over the next few years.
As Otrakji tells The Cradle, “President Assad, during his address at the Arab summit, articulated Syria’s strategy as one of patient waiting, capitalizing on opportunities while the United States grapples with a diminishing hold on global affairs.”
Indeed, as the world moves toward de-dollarization, US sanctions will have less of an impact everywhere. Influential Arab capitals like Abu Dhabi and Riyadh, now openly engaging and transacting with US-sanctioned Russia, Iran, and China – may be less deterred from doing business with Syria. Others more aligned with or dependent on Washington may be hesitant to do so, which is why Damascus may be hoping for the Saudis and Emiratis to first blaze that path.
Iran’s role
Second, Arab governments eager to bring Syria back to the Arab League may try to leverage these relations to reduce Iran’s role in the war-torn country. For now, according to Arab League Assistant Secretary General Hossam Zaki, the institution’s members “put aside” their demand that Iranian forces withdraw from Syria.
If true, this would be a major concession on the part of GCC states – one that would add to Tehran’s sense of confidence in the region following the 10 March diplomatic agreement with Saudi Arabia that eased the Islamic Republic’s regional isolation.
It is fairly certain that Arab states will continue trying to leverage their reengagement with Damascus in ways aimed at reducing Syria’s strategic dependence on Iran, regardless of whether this is realistic or not. But many experts are doubtful about Saudi Arabia and other GCC/Arab states succeeding on this front.
“History matters,” explains Dr. Marina Calculli, a Columbia University research fellow in the Department of Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies, to The Cradle.
“The alliance between Syria and Iran has an ideological origin. It is grounded in the conviction that Syria and Iran do not have the space they deserve in the international order. Internal opposition to this alliance within the Assad [government] has been obliterated. It is unlikely that Syria will trade its alliance with Iran for some business investments lightly.”
The Captagon trade
Third, is a regional desire to stem the illicit Captagon trade, which Washington and others have largely attributed to Syria and its government. Although Assad did not address this topic in his 19 May Jeddah speech, it is an important agenda item for Arab states flooded with the illicit “war drug.”
The hope is that reestablishing relations with Damascus can mobilize the Assad government to target drug trafficking. With the country still under heavy US sanctions, including the CAPTAGON Act, trade in the highly-addictive amphetamine provides Syrian and other regional dealers with billions in revenue each year.
The Caesar Act has not worked: impoverishing Syria further inhibits access to financial resources that can target the drug trade. Regardless, Iraq and Jordan have reportedly agreed to cooperate with Syria’s government in tackling the Captagon trade across their borders. Whether Damascus’s cooperation on this front has just been about optics and short-term political calculations or reflects a genuine desire to work with other regional states on the issue is unclear.
“Captagon is Assad’s golden card, its strategic asset in the normalization game. He would be willing to take down the Captagon trade only in exchange for meaningful restoration of economic relations with Arab countries and beyond,” argues Dr. Calculli.
The illegal US occupation
Fourth, is the glaring issue of the illegal US military presence in northeastern Syria. Damascus has consistently called on US forces to leave the country, and now Assad’s government is obtaining stronger support from other Arab states – along with Russia, Iran, and China – when making this demand.
In early May, Egyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian, and Saudi officials met with their Syrian counterparts and expressed their collective desire to see Assad’s government take full territorial control of Syria. Whether these US-friendly Arab states supporting the Syrian government’s position on the US occupation of Syria will have any effect on Washington’s policies remains an open question.
Yet, some experts doubt that the Syria’s return to the Arab League will impact the US military presence in Syria where American troops persistently exploit the country’s natural resources. Fatima Alghool, a Damascus-based Syrian journalist, believes what will matter most for the future of the US occupation of Syrian land is the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. She explained to The Cradle that there are two likely scenarios whereby the US military would retreat from Syria:
“The first is an agreement with Damascus, which is unlikely in the foreseeable future. The second is the repetition of the Iraqi scenario, and the withdrawal of the American forces due to the high costs they pay, whether financially or morally.”
Syrian refugee crisis
Fifth, is the conundrum over what to do with more than 5.5 million externally displaced Syrian refugees in the region. As underscored by the way the Syrian refugee issue played out in this month’s Turkish elections, those countries hosting millions of displaced Syrians since 2011 have had to deal with extreme economic challenges in doing so. Today, there is much pressure on these governments to push ahead with plans to repatriate Syrian refugees.
Within the context of normalization talks, Jordanian officials have emphasized the need to bolster the Syrian economy and issue amnesty for refugees – many of whom distrust Assad’s government – so that they are assured of safety and a home to return to. But given the stark reality of economic conditions and political dynamics in Syria, the proposals will require a lot more planning, investment, and wrangling of guarantees than currently exists.
Alghool tells The Cradle that while Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkiye are pushing for repatriation, “Damascus always links the return of refugees to reconstruction as a precondition for their return, arguing that these refugees must find homes to live in.” But how to do this without lifting or bypassing western sanctions aimed at Syria’s reconstruction sector?
“The Saudi vision in this regard coincides with the vision of Damascus, which links the return of refugees to securing the necessary infrastructure and improving living conditions in Syria, indicating Saudi intentions to contribute to the reconstruction of Syria,” she adds.
A Republican win in the next US elections may pave the way forward, suggests Alghool. She points to the “good relationship” between the GOP and the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia, and says Riyadh can apply certain pressures on a Republican president to ease up on Syria “and ensure that Washington will not oppose it.”
Concessions, rehabilitation, and rivalries
Today, most Arab states regard Syria in ways that starkly diverge from Washington’s goal of isolating and sanctioning Damascus into collapse.
There does remain a divide in how far these states may be willing to proceed with Syria. Arab League members like Egypt and Jordan are taking very incremental steps forward, trying to wrest concessions from Damascus for each move along the normalization path. Others like Tunisia and the UAE, on the other hand, seem to demand nothing from Assad’s government in exchange for reconciliation.
There are yet others, such as regional mediator Oman, which never split with Damascus even when the Sultanate’s fellow GCC members did. It comes as no surprise then that Muscat, “the city of secret negotiations,” has recently hosted direct “secret talks” between Syrian and US officials to discuss a variety of pressing issues.
Following Assad’s speech in Jeddah, the Syrian government feels emboldened and will try to push for further reintegration into the Arab world’s diplomatic fold while making as few concessions as possible.
But things are moving quickly in both regional and global geopolitics. How the different Arab League members choose to engage Damascus and how their own rivalries play out in relation to Assad’s government – and western pressure on Syria – will become clearer this year and next.
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.
أعلنت تركيا تأسيس 12 مكتباً في 12 محافظة تركية لتسهيل عودة السوريين (أ ف ب)
في تطوّر هو الأوّل من نوعه منذ ستّة أشهر، نفّذت طائرات حربية غارات على مواقع لفصائل متشدّدة في منطقة جبل الزاوية قرب طريق «M4» (حلب – اللاذقية)، في وقت شهدت فيه نقاط التماس في ريف اللاذقية قصفاً متبادلاً بالمدفعية. وجاءت الغارات الجوّية التي طاولت، وفق مصادر ميدانية، مخازن أسلحة وغرف إدارة عمليات، في وقت تنتظر فيه تركيا تحديد موعد نهائي لعقد اجتماع على مستوى «الرباعية» (سوري – تركي – روسي – إيراني) لبحث مسوّدة تقوم لجان أمنية وعسكرية بإعدادها، حتى تكون بمثابة خريطة طريق (في حال تمّ التوافق عليها) لحلحلة المشاكل المعقّدة بين البلدَين.
وبينما سجّل الميدان السياسي اشتباكاً كلامياً غير مباشر بين أنقرة ودمشق، على خلفية تمسّك الأولى بوجودها العسكري على الأراضي السورية، وإصرار الثانية على وضع جدول واضح لخروج هذه القوات، زار وزيرا دفاع وداخلية تركيا، خلوصي أكار وسليمان صويلو، مناطق في الشمال السوري، في سياق الحملة الانتخابية للرئيس التركي، رجب طيب إردوغان. ووضع صويلو الحجرَ الأساسَ لقرية سكنية في مدينة جرابلس، في ريف حلب الشمالي الشرقي، ضمن مشروع «مدن الطوب»، معلناً، في كلمة بالمناسبة، تأسيس 12 مكتباً في 12 محافظة تركية لتسهيل عودة السوريين إلى بلادهم، والسكن في تلك المدن.
وفي ما يمكن اعتباره سابقة، أشار الوزير التركي إلى أن هذه المشاريع تأتي بالتعاون مع قطر، التي تقوم عبر مؤسّسات تابعة لها بتمويلها، علماً أن أنقرة دأبت على الترويج لكون ما تقوم به في الشمال السوري مموَّلاً من المنظّمات الإنسانية الدولية ومنظّمات المجتمع المدني التركي. وتعيد مصادر سورية معارِضة، الحديث الصريح عن الدور القطري، إلى سببيَن: الأوّل، انتخابي، بهدف تقديم تطمينات للناخبين الأتراك بأن «مدن الطوب» ليست من جيوبهم؛ والثاني، رغبة قطرية واضحة في العودة إلى المشهد السوري، بعد مرحلة عملت خلالها الدوحة من خلف تركيا التي كانت تتصدّر المشهد.
وضع صويلو الحجرَ الأساسَ لقرية سكنية في مدينة جرابلس
وتكشف المصادر، في حديث إلى «الأخبار»، أن اجتماعاً عُقد أخيراً، ضمّ مجموعة من قادة الفصائل المنتشرة في ريف حلب، وناقش تشكيل غرفة عمليات للتصدّي لـ«هيئة تحرير الشام» (جبهة النصرة سابقاً)، بعد تعثّر تشكيل هذه الغرفة أكثر من مرّة في أوقات سابقة، موضحةً أن هذه التحرّكات تأتي استجابة لإيعازات تركية سابقة بتشكيل هيكلية مؤسّساتية للفصائل لوقف الفوضى القائمة، وتمهيد الأرض لإعادة اللاجئين، بالإضافة إلى تشكيل هيكلية اقتصادية تقلّل، قدر الإمكان، من الاعتماد على التمويل التركي الذي بدأ ينضب. وكان الأتراك أبلغوا الفصائل، بشكل واضح، بأن عليهم أن يقتدوا بما فعله زعيم «تحرير الشام»، أبو محمد الجولاني، تحت طائلة تسليم الأخير قيادة ريف حلب، خصوصاً أنه بات يتمتّع بعلاقات وطيدة مع أطراف دولية عدّة، من بينها الولايات المتحدة التي يتبادل معها معلومات استخباراتية بشكل مستمرّ حول «جهاديين» تعمل واشنطن على التخلّص منهم، بالإضافة إلى علاقته مع قطر، ودول أخرى مِن مِثل فرنسا التي يعمل أخيراً على تفكيك آخر ما تبقّى من «جهاديّيها» الناشطين ضمن جماعة «الغرباء».
وبالعودة إلى التسخين الميداني على نقاط التماس في ريف إدلب وصولاً إلى ريف اللاذقية، والذي كان يرتبط بمحاولات الجولاني إثبات وجوده عبر عمليات خاطفة ينفّذها «انغماسيون»، فهو يأتي هذه المرّة بالتزامن مع عكوف أنقرة على إعداد مسوّدة لخريطة طريق مشتركة مع دمشق. وتتركّز تلك المسوّدة، وفق تسريبات عديدة، على الجانبَين الاقتصادي والإنساني في مرحلتها الأولى، حيث تسعى إلى فتح طرق الترانزيت، بما فيها معبر باب الهوى في إدلب، والذي يُعتبر البوّابة الكبرى لمرور الشاحنات، بالإضافة إلى تثبيت معابر دائمة لعودة السوريين إلى مناطق سيطرة الحكومة السورية، سواءٌ منهم اللاجئون في تركيا، أو النازحون في المخيمات العشوائية قرب الشريط الحدودي. وينذر هذا التزامن بتحوّلات ميدانية عديدة، سواء في إدلب التي تشكّل نقطة ارتكاز الخطّة التركية، أو في ريف حلب الذي حوّله الجولاني خلال الشهور الماضية إلى حديقة خلفية قد يلجأ إليها في حال التوافق التركي – السوري على إخراجه من إدلب بشكل كامل. أمّا في حال تَقرّر نفيه منها بشكل جزئي، فقد يدفعه ذلك إلى تقوية حضوره الميداني عبر قضم ريف حلب، وصولاً إلى معبر باب السلامة قرب أعزاز، والذي يمكن أن يشكّل بديلاً من باب الهوى.
The second round of Turkish presidential elections has drawn global attention for its increasingly bizarre alliances, outrageous propaganda, and personality politics. Ironically, not much is expected to change in its aftermath.
The political landscape in Turkiye has become increasingly convoluted after the 14 May presidential and parliamentary elections left the Turkish presidency up for grabs – with a critical, second round of polls to be held on Sunday.
As the main candidates who failed to secure the presidency in the first round prepare for the 28 May election, Turkiye’s patchwork system of political alliances has become more intricate, marked by polarizing debates on issues such as secularism, nationalism, Syrian refugees, and the Kurdish issue. In the very year that Turkiye celebrates the Republic’s 100th anniversary, the country’s political atmosphere has grown more uncertain than ever.
The official results of the first round of the presidential election saw incumbent Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the candidate of the People’s Alliance, obtain 49.5 percent of the vote, while main opponent Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the candidate of the National Alliance, received 44.8 percent – both remaining under the 50+ percent threshold required for an outright win.
Muharrem Ince, who withdrew from the race at the last minute, secured 0.43 percent of the vote, and Sinan Ogan, the candidate of the secular nationalist ATA Alliance, received 5.17 percent.
The sequel no one asked for
The second round between Erdogan and Kilicdaroglu has essentially transformed the election into a referendum on the former’s 21-year rule. The public’s sentiment and perception have therefore become crucial in this contest.
Despite the parliamentary election’s official results being due on 19 May, the Supreme Election Board (YSK) has not yet released them, leading to some frantic domestic speculation on the reasons for this. Some observers have raised concerns about the possibility of fraudulent voters, as the number of voters is reportedly double the population growth rate. In normal circumstances, parliament should convene on the third day after the official results are published, and elected MPs should be sworn in.
However, Erdogan is purportedly stalling the swearing-in procedure because members of his alliance, the radical Islamist Kurdish movement HUDA PAR, refuse to utter the phrase “Turkish nation” during the ceremonial oath. This leaves Erdogan keen to defer the ceremony – and this drama – until after the 28 May presidential election.
In the lead up to Sunday’s polls, the main topics dominating Turkiye’s political discourse are distrust in the fairness of the election, Turkish citizenships granted to Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nationals in exchange for top-dollar real estate purchases, and the wildly disparate numbers of refugees currently residing in the country (the government says less than 4 million; the opposition claims 13 million).
These highly polarizing issues have triggered a number of realignments within the two main alliances contesting the presidency.
This time it’s personal
Since the country’s 2017 referendum, in which parliamentary democracy was replaced by a Turkish-style presidential system that recognizes unsealed ballots as valid, electoral irregularities have become a recurring concern. And so the opposition is understandably apprehensive about potential “vote theft” and the security of ballots.
Furthermore, the unusually high voter turnout rate of over 80 percent in Turkiye’s devastated earthquake-affected areas that claimed the lives of tens of thousands and caused mass migration, has raised questions.
In the southeastern region, which has a significant Kurdish population, Erdogan’s far-right, ultra-nationalist, Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) coalition partner, made significant gains in the polls, sparking allegations of ballot manipulation. Similarly, suspicions arose due to the unchanging 5 percent vote share garnered by the third candidate and kingmaker, Sinan Ogan, throughout the vote count.
However, after an initial week of furious debates, these concerns have now been fully overshadowed by the impending second round of voting.
In fact, the parliamentary elections, where Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) won 35.6 percent of the vote and the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) secured 25.3 percent – and the subsequent uncertainty regarding the exact representation of the two parties and their allies – have been largely forgotten.
The presidential contest has taken center stage as the sole, focal political point of interest. And last-minute shifts and tweaks in the madcap alliances that make up the two leading coalitions are all the Turkish media talk about.
Switching slogans and alliances
Kilicdaroglu’s Millet (or Nation) Alliance, which leads the narrative for change (essentially, ousting Erdogan), has adopted patriotic slogans such as “Those who love their homeland should come to the ballot box” and “Let the gates of hell be closed.” Although he emphasized “unity” and objected to Erdogan’s polarizing politics in the first round of polls, Kilicdaroglu has adopted a more confrontational discourse in this second phase. Interestingly, he adopted the “hell” slogan from Sinan Ogan, a candidate who was eliminated in the first vote and who has since endorsed Erdogan ahead of the runoff vote.
Before 14 May, Ogan stated, “Maybe we won’t open the gates of heaven, but we will close the gates of hell.” The “hell” he referred to was the Erdogan government. While harshly criticizing Erdogan for his handling of Syrian refugees, Ogan also declared that Turkish nationalists – like himself – would never align themselves with the Islamist HUDA PAR. He even suggested that the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), representing Kurdish politics, would negotiate a deal with Erdogan in the second round.
But, ironically, it was Ogan who ended up striking a deal with Erdogan, announcing his support for the president on the grounds of maintaining “stability” in Turkiye. This, despite the fact that Ogan’s main condition regarding the repatriation of refugees appears not to have been met: Although a popular election issue, Erdogan has ruled out repatriating Syrian asylum seekers.
Winning over the nationalists
It remains uncertain how much of Ogan’s nationalist voter base will take to Erdogan. The ATA Alliance, to which he owes his candidacy, has become heavily divided in advance of the second polls. The foundation of the alliance consists of the far-right Zafer Party, in collaboration with some smaller political parties. Two days after Ogan threw his weight behind Erdogan, Zafer Party Leader Umit Ozdag announced his support for Kilicdaroglu.
Unlike Ogan, Ozdag says he has clinched a deal with his candidate – Kilicdaroglu – to repatriate Syrian refugees on the basis of international law and humanitarianism. Ozdag has also said they agreed that there would be zero compromise in the fight against the Kurdish PKK and terrorism.
A staunch nationalist, Ozdag frequently invokes Mustafa Kemal Ataturk – the much-revered founder of the Turkish Republic – rails against Erdogan’s role in accepting millions of Syrian refugees and selling Turkish citizenship in exchange for cash, and constantly warns about Turkiye’s “demographic threat.”
In part, this refers to the Erdogan administration’s distribution of Turkish citizenship to anyone who purchases real estate for $400,000, sharply increased rents caused by the influx of foreigners, and the perceived influence of these people (without any ties to Turkiye or knowledge of the Turkish language) on elections. All these issues feature heavily in the nationalist movement’s narrative and propaganda.
As an example, during the first round of elections, the Turkish public reacted strongly to a live broadcast on the private, pro-government A Haber news channel. In the aired footage, a Kuwaiti individual speaking Arabic into the microphone after casting his vote shocked Turkish viewers. The channel swiftly cut the broadcast and deleted the video.
Unprecedented election propaganda
But if this election can be distilled into a popularity referendum on Erdogan, the sitting Turkish president has some clear advantages over his opponent: He uses every state tool at his disposal and has a mainstream media loyal to him. While TV channels cover Erdogan’s statements and rallies around the clock, Kilicdaroglu has few opportunities to be nationally heard outside of opposition media outlets.
As a result, Erdogan has been particularly sloppy about his political rhetoric, making ludicrous claims and sometimes outright lies – without being duly checked by the media.
In a Trumpian boast during a rally in the earthquake-stricken province of Malatya, Erdogan boasted that the number of people who came to listen to him in the square was higher than the number of deaths caused by the 6 February earthquake.
While victims had cried out for urgent government assistance for days without a response – which Erdogan himself has admitted – he told rally crowds: “We mobilized all means from the first hours of the disaster.” There have been many such gaffes along the campaign trail this year, which finally culminated in a major media scandal over a faked video montage.
Erdogan accidentally admitted that a video montage shown by his team in public squares before the first round of votes had been faked. The edited footage depicted PKK leaders in the Qandil region of Iraq singing along to a song in Kilicdaroglu’s political ad. The intent of the video was clearly to link the latter to the PKK and terrorism.
The opposition reacted strongly to the slander, with Kilicdaroglu calling Erdogan a “montage fraudster” and filing a lawsuit for compensation. But because of the president’s iron grip on mainstream Turkish media, it is not known how many voters at those rallies are aware of the fakery.
The propaganda has progressed well beyond the video scandal. Fake brochures attributed to Kilicdaroglu, including bizarre campaign promises and praise for terrorism, have been detected and prosecuted along the way. There’s no telling how much of an effect these fake-news scandals will affect Sunday’s polls.
‘Unprincipled coalitions’
As the second round vote approaches, Professor Emin Gurses from Sakarya University, highlights the shallow opportunism of these Turkish elections, telling The Cradle:
“In Turkiye, there is an understanding that it is permissible to lie while doing politics. Voters voted for the candidate they know and recognize through trust. They [politicians] act to win the election. They don’t look at friend or foe.”
The last-minute alliance shifts may not even change anything. According to Gurses, Sinan Ogan has little to gain by backing Erdogan, and on the other side, even if a deal is struck with Ozdag, it will be challenging for Kilicdaroglu to close the 2.5 million-vote gap with Erdogan.
Meanwhile, columnist Mehmet Ali Guller from Cumhuriyet has highlighted the consequences of the 50+1 system in Turkiye, which he argues leads to unprincipled coalitions, with ideology, programs, and politics pushed to the background. Guller charges that there are no significant differences in the fundamental policies of both sides:
“There is no fundamental difference between the two options in terms of economic policies, it is in the details. And in terms of foreign policy, there is no fundamental difference between the two options, there are details. Because both options are essentially Atlanticist and NATOist.”
100 years on: It’s looking bleak
Regardless of the election outcome, Guller foresees an ongoing economic crisis that offers no short-term solution. He also notes that both Islamists and nationalists exist in the two main political coalitions, creating an ideological stalemate of sorts, and predicts that Turkiye will be forced to hold another election within the next five years.
If Kilicdaroglu wins, he may find himself governing the country using decrees inherited from his predecessor despite advocating for a return to parliamentary democracy, as his alliance will be in the minority in parliament.
In this “unprincipled” political environment, it is even plausible that Erdodan, the architect of the Turkish-style presidential system, may consider reverting to a “parliamentary system.” On the other hand, if Erdogan emerges victorious, an unprecedented economic crisis is expected, with Turkiye’s CDS rating surpassing 700 and the US dollar projected to reach at least 24 Turkish liras.
In the upcoming local elections, Erdogan is likely to continue his right-wing populist campaign to reclaim cities like Istanbul, which he lost in 2019.
Because Turkiye requires at least $200 billion in resources, Erdogan’s foreign policy stance will be determined by economic opportunity, as he is not seen as a reliable partner by any country, on either side of the global divide. He is expected to continue his balancing act: putting the “migrant issue” before the EU; Syria and Ukraine before Russia; relations with Russia before the US, and using Turkiye’s presence in Syria as leverage over the Arab world, using these as bargaining chips to maximize his gains.
In any case, the outlook for the Republic of Turkiye, on its 100th anniversary, appears bleak.
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.
The 32nd Arab Summit convened on Friday in the Saudi city of Jeddah in presence of the Lebanese prime minister Najib Mikati, the Syrian President Bashar Assad and 13 other leaders.
Arab Summit
The Arab League had suspended since 2011 Syria participation as a number of Arab regimes were involved in backing the terrorist war on the Syrian people, army and government.
On May 7, 2023, Arab League foreign ministers adopted a decision to readmit Syria, consolidating a regional push to normalize ties with the country that confronted a devastating terrorist war during the latest decade.
The Arab Summit in Jeddah has concentrated on Syria participation, the centrality of the Palestinian cause and the crisis in Sudan.
The opening speeches welcomed President Assad, hoping that Syria return to the Arab League contributes to the restoration of its stability.
Mikati: We look forward to KSA’s support and gesture towards Lebanon to rise again
Caretaker Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, on Friday said in his speech at the 32nd Arab Summit in Jeddah: “Allow me to call this summit the ‘healing wounds” Summit, as it was preceded by an agreement to restore normal relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and also the return of sisterly Syria to play its full role in the League of Arab States.”
He continued: “We all know the Arab problems and issues, from the tragedy of Palestine, to Yemen and recently to the unfortunate situation in Sudan, but I want to talk about my country, Lebanon, which continues to suffer from multiple crises that have weighed heavily on the Lebanese people…”
He said, “This situation has become more complicated with the presidential vacancy and the impossibility of electing a new president. In addition, Lebanon has never hesitated to open its doors to our displaced Syrian brothers, out of faith in the brotherhood of the two peoples and the advancement of humanitarian considerations over everything else. However, the long duration of the crisis, the failure to address it, and the very large increase in the number of displaced persons, render the displacement crisis greater than Lebanon’s ability to bear, in terms of its infrastructure, social influences and political repercussions at home, and in terms of the natural right of those displaced to return to their cities and villages.”
He added, “This return cannot be achieved without combined Arab efforts, with the support of the international community, and through communication and dialogue with sisterly Syria within the framework of an inclusive and stimulating Arab position through construction and recovery projects for the demolished areas to set a road map for the return of the Syrian brethren to their homes.”
He added, “This return cannot be achieved without combined Arab efforts, with the support of the international community, and through communication and dialogue with the sisterly Syria within the framework of an inclusive and stimulating Arab position through construction and recovery projects for the demolished areas to set a road map for the return of the Syrian brethren to their homes.”
He continued, “In this meeting, it is necessary to affirm Lebanon’s respect for all successive international resolutions issued by the UN Security Council and the decisions of the Arab League and its charter, and its commitment to implementing its provisions. I also affirm, in the name of all of Lebanon, respecting the interests of brotherly countries, their sovereignty, and their social and political security, and combating the export of contraband to them and everything that harms stability in them. It is a firm commitment that stems from a sense of responsibility towards our brethren and our concern for their security and safety and the purity and sincerity of fraternal relations with them.”
He concluded: “Whoever was able to transfer the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its youth to the leadership and pioneering positions they have reached and transform the Kingdom into a productive country in every sense of the word, in a short period, will not find it difficult to support brotherly Lebanon. From here, we look forward to the Kingdom’s support and its fraternal gesture towards my country, Lebanon, so that it can rise again.”
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman welcomed Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad back to the Arab League.
“We are pleased today by the attendance of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in this summit,” Bin Salman said in a speech, adding he hoped the return would lead to “stability” in Syria.
President al-Assad: We are in front of a historic opportunity to rearrange our affairs with the least amount of foreign intervention
President Bashar Al-Assad addressed the summit, saying, “We have to search about the big titles that pose threat to our future and produce our crises in order to not drown in addressing the results, not the reasons.”
President Al-Assad said the headlines are too many for words, and summits are not enough… They do not begin with the crimes of the Zionist entity, which is rejected by the Arabs, and do not end with the danger of the Ottoman expansionist mentality and are inseparable from the challenge of development as a top priority for our developing societies, here comes the role of the League of Arab States as the natural platform for discussing various issues and addressing them.
“We are in front of a historic opportunity to rearrange our affairs with the least amount of foreign intervention,” the President said.
The Syrian President added that the joint Arab action is in need to common visions, strategies and targets.
President al-Assad hoped the Summit would be a starting point for the Arab action, solidarity among Arab states to achieve peace, prosperity and development in the region instead of war and destruction.
The President added that the cracks that have emerged over the last decade must be addressed, and the most important thing is to let the people manage their internal affairs and avoid external interference in their affair.
President al-Assad thanked the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and his highness crown prince Mohammad bin Salman for the great role of Saudi Arabia and its efforts to boost reconciliation in the Arab region and make this summit a success.
The Algerian FM Ahmad Attaf welcomed President Assad, underlining the importance of restoring the Arab unity.
Attaf denounced the recent Zionist aggression on Gaza, calling on the UNSC to halt the Israeli attacks on the Palestinians.
Arab Summit’s closing statement urges Lebanon to elect president, backs refugee return
The closing statement of the Summit underlined the importance of a fair settlement for the Palestinian cause, rejecting any foreign intervention that would fuel the crisis in Sudan.
The statement welcomed the agreement concluded by Iran and Saudi to reinforce the security and economic cooperation between the two countries.
The Arab summit called on the Lebanese to speedily elect a new president and form an effective government, underscoring the importance of the Syrian refugees return to their homeland.
قدّم مشهد الانتخابات الرئاسية التركية صورة شديدة التركيب والتعقيد بين عناصر تتشكّل منها كل مشاكل وأزمات المنطقة والعالم، وتدور حول أسئلة كبرى وتفصيلية، لتقول إن هناك توازناً هشاً بين معسكرين متداخلين، لا يمكن للمفاضلة بينهما أن تتم إلا بصعوبة عالية، بما يُعبّر عن غياب الخيارات الواضحة في تعبيرها عن مقاربة مشاكل الغد بلغة متجانسة؛ حيث يمثّل الرئيس أردوغان نموذج الإسلام السياسي القريب من الغرب ومفهوم الدولة المدنية، مقابل منافسه كمال كليجدار كممثل للعلمانية الأصولية المشبعة بروح الغرب والمعادية للدين؛ ويمثل أردوغان من موقعه في زعامة الأخوان المسلمين ضمن معسكر الإسلام السياسي نموذج العنف وشهوة البحث عن دور على حساب استقلال دول المنطقة، وصولاً للاستعداد لاستضافة عشرات آلاف الإرهابيين التكفيريين، وبالمقابل تصدير بعضهم الى حيث يلزم، تحت عباءة مشروع العثمانية الجديدة وحلم السلطنة الكامن والجاهز للظهور دائماً، ومقابله منافس يريد استعادة نموذج أتاتورك لدور إقليمي ينضبط بالأجندة الغربية، لكن دون خوض حروب وطموحات التوسع؛ ويمثل أردوغان مشروعاً استقلالياً يقف على مسافة المصالح المتحركة بين الشرق والغرب، من حرب أوكرانيا إلى حرب سورية، والبحث عن شراكات سياسية واقتصادية تأخذ بالاعتبار متغيرات العالم ومخاطر البقاء في المركب الغربي بقيادة أميركية متوحشة، يأنس اليها منافسه ويأخذ عليه التقرّب من روسيا، بينما في الاقتصاد قدّم أردوغان نموذج اقتصاد قوميّ عماد النهوض بالصناعة وإنتاج دور يستند الى عناصر القوة في الجغرافيا الاقتصادية، ويقابله منافس يتبنى الليبرالية الكاملة، حيث لا دور للدولة في الاقتصاد؛ وفيما يقدم أردوغان مثالاً قاسياً في التعامل مع الحريات الشخصية والاجتماعية والسياسية والاعلامية، يتباهى خصمه بالذهاب الى أبعد الحدود دفاعاً عنها وصولاً لتشريع المثلية.
يقول المشهد الانتخابي في الجولة الأولى إن الأتراك حائرون. وهذا معنى توزعهم بنسب متساوية تقريباً بين المتنافسين، في لحظة يطلق عليها علماء الاجتماع والفلاسفة، لحظة انعدام اليقين. ولعل تصويت ستة وخمسين مليون تركي من أصل ستين مليوناً يحق لهم الانتخاب، يدل على حجم الانخراط الذي تعيشه المجتمعات في محاولة البحث عن اليقين، وانقسام هؤلاء الى نصفين شبه متساويين، بين ثمانية وعشرين مليوناً في ضفة وخمسة وعشرين مليوناً في ضفة مقابلة، ومقابل الإثنين ثلاثة ملايين صوّتوا للمرشح القومي المتطرف، تعبير عن حال عدم اليقين، وعدم وضوح الخيارات بصورة حاسمة؛ وبالتدقيق في اتجاهات التصويت، سوف يتبين أن المدن الكبرى كانت صاحبة الصوت الحاسم لصالح خيارات كليجدار، مقابل تصويت الأرياف بنسب أعلى لصالح أردوغان. وهذا يعني أن الأرياف صوتت بدافع الميل لصالح الهوية القومية الإسلامية المتصالحة مع المنطقة، خصوصاً في ضوء مرارة التجربة مع محاولات الانضمام الى الاتحاد الأوروبي، والإطار العنصري الذي قابلت به أوروبا طلب تركيا ذات الغالبية الإسلامية للانضمام إليها، بخلفية الخشية على التكوين الديمغرافي الأوروبي والحرص على ما وصفه الخبراء بالنقاء المسيحي، كما صوّتت لصالح دور الدولة الاقتصادي في السكن والتعليم والصحة ودعم الزراعة والسياحة والصناعة، بينما تأثرت المدن بالتطلع نحو الاندماج بالغرب خصوصاً مع الضائقة الاقتصادية وتراجع القيمة الشرائية لليرة التركية، وتغليب الدولة التي بلا هوية على نموذج الهوية التي قدّمها أردوغان، والتصويت للحريات بأبعادها الإعلامية والشخصية والاجتماعية بنسختها الليبرالية، بما فيها المثلية، والرغبة بالخروج من التوترات والنزاعات والحروب.
تكشف الانتخابات الدور المؤثر لشريحة وازنة وقضية بارزة. الشريحة هي الشباب الذين يتمركزون في المدن، ويبدو أن غالبية كبيرة منهم لم تصوّت لصالح أردوغان، ولو على خلفية طلب التغيير تحت شعار “عشرون عاماً تكفي”، أما القضية التي تعاني منها المدن وحضرت في خلفية التصويت بقوة فهي قضية اللاجئين السوريين، التي يتحمّل أردوغان مسؤولية تفاقمها، من موقعه ودوره في الحرب على سورية، مقابل التزام منافسه بإعادتهم خلال سنتين، ولو اقتضى الأمر ترحيلهم. والواضح أن ضغط قضية النزوح السوري على سكان المدن اقتصادياً واجتماعياً على خلفية الأزمة التي تعصف بالاقتصاد التركي وارتفاع نسب البطالة والتنافس على الأعمال بين العمال الأتراك والعمال السوريين، وتحميل البرجوازية السورية بين اللاجئين مسؤوليّة ارتفاع بدلات الإيجار والبيع في السوق العقاري، والسيطرة على بعض المهن، فيما يبدو أردوغان متردداً في اتخاذ القرار الذي يجعله أقرب لتقديم حل عملي لقضية النزوح، حيث يمكن التوصل مع الدولة السورية بدعم روسي إيراني خليجي، لروزنامة تتضمّن الانسحاب التركي من سورية وعودة النازحين وتفكيك الكانتونات التقسيمية والجماعات الإرهابية شمال شرق وشمال غرب سورية بالتوازي خلال سنتين.
يمكن القول إن الدورة الثانية قد تمنح فرصاً أفضل لمنافس أردوغان، إلا إذا أشهر أردوغان ورقته الرابحة بشجاعة، وأعلن استعداده للالتزام بروزنامة متوازية لعودة النازحين والانسحاب من سورية، عبر قمة سورية تركية بمشاركة روسية وايرانية تعقد في الرياض أو أبو ظبي تعلن هذا الالتزام وتضع له جداوله الزمنية.
Servicemen of Lebanese General Security updating figures on Syrian refugees in Lebanon (May 2023).
The issue of Syrian refugees is back in the spotlight in Lebanon, with Lebanese government being under international pressure to keep the Syrians on its soil and Damascus stipulating ministerial cooperation with Beirut in order to get the refugees back in their homeland.
Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported on Monday that the issue of Syrian refugees has dominated the political scene in recent weeks “in light of numerous regional factors that reflected an Arab openness towards Syria in the form of negotiations aimed at the return of refugees.”
The paper pointed to recent discussions about the need to repatriate them to their home country due to the political, social, and economic costs borne by Lebanon due to their presence.
Al-Akhbar reported a Lebanese “sense that the implementation of Syrian refugees’ return is almost impossible”, despite a meeting by the Lebanese government which resulted in the Lebanese General Security being tasked with coordinating the issue with the Lebanese Security Forces.
Caretaker PM Najib Mikati heads ministerial meeting on Syrian refugees in Lebanon
The daily attributed this “sense” to the sharp Lebanese division between supporters and opponents, “as well as the political pressure exerted by non-governmental organizations that work with the international community and benefit from unmonitored funding programs, serving the external powers’ project aimed at resettling of the Syrian refugees in Lebanon.”
Al-Akhbar quoted relevant sources as saying that “no security agency in Lebanon has offered confirmed information on the numbers of refugees.”
The sources believe that “there will be no solution for them,” pointing out that “the numbers said to have left are incorrect,” according to the daily.
The sources also stated that “the meetings held by the acting Director-General of General Security, Brigadier General Elias al-Bissari, with the refugee commission and Syrian and European officials, showed that the difficulties that previously prevented their return are still valid.”
In my first introductory meeting with B. Gen. Elias Baissari, we discussed areas of cooperation between the UN and @DGSGLB . We addressed Lebanese concerns regarding the issue of Syrian refugees and the importance of adhering to international law. pic.twitter.com/06z0VE9JNi
“Syria has informed Lebanese authorities that it would not accept discussing the solution of the issue through a security agency and that it wants cooperation and coordination at a ministerial level. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the Lebanese government to establish a high-level ministerial delegation with the explicit purpose of undertaking a visit to Syria, to engage in comprehensive discussions surrounding the modalities of repatriation and capitalizing on the favorable settlement conditions within the region, in order to expedite the resolution of the current crisis,” Al-Akhbar cited the sources as saying.
Notably, the previous ministerial delegation’s visit to Syria subsequent to the February 6th earthquake constituted a significant milestone, breaking the longstanding embargo on Damascus and paving the way for a potential normalization of diplomatic relations between the two nations, the daily added, noting that Mikati did not respond to such calls and insisted on limiting the task to the General Security due to the international pressure he faced.
Earlier last week, former Lebanese president Michel Aoun warned against a plan to integrate Syrian refugees in Lebanon, noting that some European countries are hindering their return to their homeland.
“We know who is behind the entrance of Syrian refugees into Lebanon, and we had warned against such scenarios,” Aoun said on April 30.
Ex-Lebanese president Michel Aoun in the southern town of Jezzine (Sunday, April 30, 2023).
The ex-president said he was not ashamed to say that most of the European countries have been working to keep the Syrian refugees in Lebanon and prevent their repatriation.
Similar remarks were also made last week by Nawar Al-Sahili, a Hezbollah official who is tasked with following up on the Syrian refugees’ issue. Al-Sahili stressed that both the United States and European countries have been pressing Lebanon in order to prevent their return.
The Hezbollah official also warned that Lebanon has been paying heavy price – on financial, social and security levels – due to the presence of huge numbers of Syrian refugees on its soil.
For various reasons related to political leverage, regional grandstanding, and outright animosity, Qatar is likely to remain the last Arab state to return to Syria.
While most Arab countries have already moved to reestablish relations with the Syrian government – in line with a regional and international recognition of the failure to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad after a dozen years – some Arab states, led by Qatar, are out of sync, opposing rapprochement with Damascus.
Doha’s ongoing refusal to normalize ties with Damascus raises many questions, especially as it contradicts the trend of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, under Saudi leadership, to restore relations with Syria to their pre-war levels.
It also contradicts the attempts of Qatar’s only regional strategic ally, Turkiye, to resolve its differences with Damascus, abandon its decade-long enmity with Syria, in a Russian-mediated effort to solve a wide range of problems between the two neighbors. The most prominent of these issues is the removal of Turkish troops from northern Syrian territories, the crisis of Syrian refugees and displaced civilians on both sides of the border, and the growing capabilities of US-backed, secessionist Kurds leading a “self-administration” project inside large swathes of eastern and northern Syria, which Turkiye sees as a threat to its soft underbelly.
Today, Qatar appears to be virtually the only Arab regional state actively toeing the rejectionist position of the US and EU in refusing to open up to the government in Damascus.
The Qatari betrayal of Syria
With the ascension of President Assad to power in 2000, Syrian-Qatari relations witnessed a significant improvement, reaching a climax with Israel’s July 2006 war on Lebanon and then its 2008 war on the Gaza Strip.
Qatar’s public posture appeared firmly supportive of both the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance, and Doha became a major funder of the post-war reconstruction of areas destroyed by Israeli attacks. This coincided with the improvement of relations between Qatar and Hamas, the Palestinian resistance’s most prominent faction.
Between 2000 and 2011, relations between Doha and Damascus strengthened outside of the conventional political arena. Assad and former Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani struck up a personal relationship, and the latter paid numerous visits to Damascus.
With the 2011 outbreak of unrest in Syria, signs of a clear and unexpected Qatari shift began via Al-Jazeera – Doha’s most prominent media outlet – and its biased, often inciteful coverage of events in Syria. Sequentially, the political stances of Qatar, Hamas, and Turkiye began to change, with Doha and Ankara pressing for Damascus to alter its position on the banned Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood – designated a terrorist organization – and to include it in governance.
When Damascus completely rejected the Qatari and Turkish demands, the unrest in Syria turned from civil disobedience to armed assault, which began to expand rapidly throughout the country. Turkiye opened its borders to foreign fighters from all over the world, with Arab states of the Persian Gulf funding – initially led by Qatar – amounting to billions of dollars, according to the Financial Times.
As the war on Syria expanded, a US-led alliance was formed to train Syrian fighters, and two command centers were established, “MOC” (Military Operations Command) in Jordan, and “MOM” (Müşterek Operasyon Merkezi) in Turkiye.
The task of overthrowing the Syrian government was transferred to Riyadh, led by former intelligence chief Bandar Bin Sultan, who demanded a budget of $2 trillion, according to Bin Jassim. With the growing emergence of “jihadi” terrorist organizations, led by ISIS and the Nusra Front, Syrian authorities lost control over massive swathes of territory and a partial blockade was imposed on Damascus.
The Syrian war entered a new phase in 2015, after Russian military forces intervened at the request of Damascus. Less than a month later, the US launched an “international coalition” to militarily intervene in Syria under the pretext of fighting ISIS. This changed the contours of the war map. With the help of foreign allied forces, including Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, the Syrian government regained control of much of the country, and established the ‘Astana process’ with Russia, Turkiye, and Iran to demilitarize areas outside of US and Kurdish separatist control.
Qatar’s continued Syrian role
Despite an ostensible decline in Qatar’s role in the Syrian war, Doha has not followed in the footsteps of most Gulf countries, who recognized their efforts to unseat Assad had failed. Even the Saudis, who played an oversized role in the assault against Damascus, dialed down their rhetoric against Syria in recent years, and have now moved to reconcile with Assad and his government.
Instead, Qatar’s adversarial footprint in Syria has continued unabated. It maintains its relationships with various Syrian opposition factions, including the Al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front (which controls Idlib and areas in the countryside of Aleppo), and has transformed the Syrian embassy in Doha into an operations room for adversaries of Syria.
Syrian opposition sources tell The Cradle that Doha continues its ties with all the armed factions in northern Syria, including the Levant Front, the National Army – which it co-funds with Turkiye – and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.
These relationships guarantee Doha – which has pumped billions of dollars into the Syrian war – a desirable modicum of influence in northern and northwestern Syria. The Qataris have bet heavily on the jihadist factions there; these militias are less expensive to maintain because of their efficiencies in self-financing and on the battlefield. Furthermore, the jihadi groups have ultimately proven to be more loyal to Qatar’s interests, especially Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the former Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria.
Likewise, the presence of more than a million Syrians in hundreds of encampments near the Turkish border provides Doha – which has financed the construction of towns for the displaced in this region – with additional leverage to be used on Damascus when the moment arises.
This partially explains the reasons for Qatar’s continued refusal to restore relations with Damascus and approve the return of Syria to the Arab League. Doha seeks to exert leverage and extract a price from the Assad government in any future Syrian solution. But there are several other factors that impact Qatari intransigence on the Syrian issue:
First, Qatar currently hosts the largest US Central Command (CENTCOM) military base in West Asia, and Washington outright rejects any and all rapprochement initiatives with Damascus.
Second, is Assad’s refusal to normalize relations with Turkiye pending a wholesale withdrawal of Turkish military forces from occupied Syrian territories. So long as Syrian-Turkish differences remain unresolved, Doha will not move to improve its own ties with Damascus.
Third, is Syria’s own refusal to normalize relations with Qatar without the latter paying a substantial price for its role in inciting, expanding, and militarizing the conflict. Qatar is a small, wealthy emirate, far from Syria’s borders. Unlike other regional supporters of opposition militias – such as Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and the UAE, who exercise substantial regional influence – Qatar has little value for Damascus other than the outsized wealth it can contribute to Syria’s reconstruction.
However, these deeply-embedded Syrian-Qatari differences do not preclude Syria’s return to the Arab League fold, from which it was suspended in 2011. Qatar cannot afford to exercise a veto on Syria’s return all by itself, nor will the organization tolerate being held up on this critical inter-Arab issue solely based on Doha’s stubborn refusal.
On 7 May, Arab foreign ministers will meet in Cairo specifically to discuss Syria’s Arab League restitution. Arab diplomatic sources inform The Cradle that the mere convening of the League Council at this extraordinary political level means that there is an agreement to endorse the Syrian return. They say that the council is likely to discuss two proposals: The first, submitted by Saudi Arabia, will require Qatar to abstain from voting, and the second is for Syria to initially return to the League as an “observer,” with the provision that it regains its full membership next year.
As for Kuwait and Morocco, which also ostensibly reject Syria’s return, the diplomatic sources reveal that Saudi Arabia has managed to persuade them not to oppose its proposal, which will make it easier for Doha “not to oppose what the member states of the Arab League are unanimously agreed upon.”
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.
Did Lebanon’s US-backed army commander exploit the Syrian refugee crisis and incite clashes with them to catapult himself into the highly-contested Lebanese presidency? The US silence on Joseph Aoun’s illegal deportations last week is deafening.
Since the 2011 outbreak of war in Syria, hundreds of thousands of displaced Syrians have fled to Lebanon, worsening an already catastrophic economic crisis in the small Levantine state. The situation has led to rising tensions and xenophobia toward Syrians, whose presence is seen as responsible for exacerbating the crisis.
Currently, around 4 million people, including 1.5 million Syrian refugees and 2.2 million vulnerable Lebanese, are in need of humanitarian aid. As such, there have been growing calls to repatriate the displaced, particularly among Lebanese Christians who fear a demographic change that could further reduce their shrinking population in a country they view as the “Switzerland of the Middle East.”
Last October, the Lebanese General Directorate of General Security announced that the most updated number of displaced Syrians in Lebanon had reached 2,080,000, which constitutes about 30 percent of the Lebanese population.
In March 2023, EU Commissioner for Crisis Management Janiz Lenarcic stated that “Lebanon is facing multiple crises which are putting more and more people at risk. In addition, the country hosts some 1.5 million Syrian refugees, the highest number of refugees per capita in the world.”
On April 26, Lebanese Minister of Defense Maurice Sleem – like other officials in recent years – accused the international community of pressuring Lebanon to keep displaced Syrians in the country and integrating them into Lebanese society by paying them money in hard currency.
Challenges of the Syrian refugee crisis
The following day, Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar quoted Germany’s Ambassador to Beirut Andreas Kindl as saying, in a private conversation, that Christians in Lebanon must “accommodate” the fact that they have become a minority.
This politically combustive issue has been compounded by the UN’s refusal to provide Lebanon with accurate data on the number of registered Syrian refugees in the country, estimated by the UN today to be around 830,000.
Further complicating matters is a long-term US and western pressure campaign on the Lebanese government to prevent the establishment of contacts with the government of President Bashar al-Assad that could facilitate the return of displaced Syrians to safe areas back home.
Those western pressures are also in high gear inside Syria, where a US/EU-led blockade and sanctions on the country have crippled the state’s economy. Furthermore, US military occupation of the northeast – rich in Syrian oil and agricultural wealth, now siphoned off by US allies – makes it difficult for the Syrian government to provide reconstruction support for returnees or help absorb them into the local labor force without international aid programs.
The Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon is further compounded by the fact that western countries, NGOs, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) link their refugee aid to displaced Syrians remaining in Lebanon. They refuse to fund any support programs for them in their home country, which the Lebanese increasingly believe encourages refugees to stay put.
Failed repatriation attempts
In late 2022, the Lebanese General Directorate of General Security attempted to organize voluntary return trips for the displaced to Syria after obtaining guarantees for their safety from the government in Damascus.
However, these efforts failed due to western pressures, unsubstantiated warnings from international organizations that refugees would be persecuted upon return to Syria, and the unwillingness of the displaced themselves to lose foreign food aid and financial assistance.
In 2019, the Supreme Council of Defense in Lebanon – the body responsible for implementing the state’s national defense strategy – issued instructions to the security services to deport Syrians who enter Lebanon through illegal border crossings.
That year marked the start of Lebanon’s financial crisis, and the weakened government succumbed to western pressure, refraining from making any significant efforts to repatriate the displaced or communicate with Damascus to coordinate their return.
The irony is that large numbers of these ‘refugees’ visit Syria periodically without being subjected to any harassment. During the Eid al-Fitr holiday at the end of last Ramadan, 37,000 Syrians visited their country and returned to Lebanon, which according to Lebanese Labor Minister Mustafa Bayram, de facto deprives them of their refugee status.
The Lebanese army illegally deports Syrians
Matters suddenly escalated on 21 April, with reports that the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) raided the homes of Syrian families in various locations across the country and forcibly deported dozens of Syrians who had entered Lebanon irregularly or whose residency permits had expired.
According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), the heavy-handed incident, which violated the principle of non-refoulment of refugees, involved the forced repatriation of no fewer than 168 Syrian refugees since the start of April 2023:
“The overwhelming majority of forced returnees were brutally beaten and insulted during the raids on their houses and places of residence. They were denied the opportunity to take any of their personal belongings with them.”
These sudden deportations occurred amid an escalation of anti-Syrian sentiment, clashes between Lebanese and displaced persons in some areas, and an anti-refugee social media campaign linking them to increased local crime rates.
Ominously, the LAF did not coordinate the deportations with either the Lebanese or Syrian governments or with the Lebanese General Security, whose jurisdiction refugees fall under. The LAF has sought to justify its actions by claiming that overflowing Lebanese security service detention centers were no longer able to accommodate Syrian detainees.
A Lebanese military source reveals to The Cradle that the LAF began implementing its decision to deport Syrians to the border about two weeks ago, that the decision to do so was made by LAF Commander General Joseph Aoun himself, and that Lebanese army intelligence handed over the refugees to the Land Border Regiment which transported them across the border.
General Joseph Aoun: Presidential motives?
In Lebanon, the timing of the army’s decision to deport Syrian refugees has drawn attention to the possible political motives behind this move. LAF Commander Joseph Aoun is a close friend of Washington’s – having last year received $100 million from the US directly (bypassing the Lebanese government) – and is viewed as a potential candidate to fill the vacant seat of the hotly-contested Lebanese presidency, whose incumbent’s term ended in October.
Yet the army’s decision to deport refugees openly contravenes US policy to keep the displaced in Lebanon.
Aoun’s ‘violation’ of the US policy against repatriation of Syrian refugees – without fear of an American or western reaction to his “forced deportations” – adds a further layer of confusion about the army’s move. This ambiguity increased after the re-circulation of a video by Syrian dissident Kamal al-Labwani – who enjoys close ties to the US and Israel – in which he insults the Lebanese army and calls on Syrian refugees to take up arms.
At the same time, dozens of videos showing Lebanese violence against Syrians and news about Syrian crimes in Lebanon began spreading like wildfire across social media platforms – many of these were later discovered to be either fabricated or very old.
The deportation decision also coincides with the sudden rising domestic and international consensus around a presidency led by former MP Suleiman Franjieh, who is supported by Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah.
A senior Lebanese intelligence source tells The Cradle that there is concern that the deportation was a stunt to rally the Lebanese – at the eleventh hour – around the candidacy of Joseph Aoun, who will be portrayed as a “savior” for ejecting refugees.
Just as the Turkish opposition this week chased a “bump” in polls by vowing to repatriate Syrian refugees in the run-up to Turkiye’s critical May elections, the intel source fears that Lebanon’s army commander is employing similar tactics – despite the dangers these actions pose to Lebanon’s fragile political and security space.
Fears of a “presidential conspiracy” are also spreading on social media, including a tweet on 26 April from the head of the Free Patriotic Movement Gebran Bassil, the most prominent national opponent of Joseph Aoun’s accession to the presidency:
“The random Syrian exodus was a conspiracy that we faced alone, and expelling them by violence is a conspiracy that we will face. We support a safe and dignified return and the implementation of international and Lebanese law by the return of every illegally displaced person and the prevention of any resettlement.”
Bassil warned that “the regional opportunity is open for the return of the displaced, and we will not allow the conspirators and those who finally woke up to waste it through incitement and inhumanity.”
Confidence in this scenario has also risen because of reports from US Embassy in Beirut contacts that the LAF commander remains Washington’s first choice for the presidency.
Did Washington merely choose to ignore the LAF’s deportation of refugees, after having invested many years and millions of dollars trying to prevent the return of Syrians back home? Or did the Americans collude with the Lebanese army commander to swing him into the presidential seat at an opportune moment?
Today, the LAF and state security forces announced the capture of several “cells” of armed Syrians in Lebanon. After 12 years of the Syrian war, and at least five years after the conflict’s military phase declined, did Syrians in Lebanon suddenly decide to pick up weapons against this state? Or is this further US-style “momentum” to build a narrative that launches Joseph Aoun into Lebanon’s most coveted political position?
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.
Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad arrived in Saudi Arabia on Wednesday, 12 April, in a major signal that Syria’s decade-long regional isolation is nearing an end, Reutersreported.
Mekdad and his delegation landed in the city of Jeddah on the Red Sea following an invitation from his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al-Saud, to discuss bilateral relations and issues of mutual interest, according to Syrian state media SANA.
Mekdad’s visit is the first by a senior Syrian diplomat to Saudi Arabia since the start of the US-backed war on Syria that began in 2011. Saudi Arabia played a key role in the covert war at the behest of Washington, which spent billions as part of the CIA’s Operation Timber Sycamore to topple the Syrian government.
Riyadh has recently distanced itself from Washington, however, and reached an agreement with Damascus to re-establish ties and reopen their embassies.
“(The two ministers) will hold a session of talks on efforts to reach a political solution to the Syrian crisis that preserves the unity, security, and stability of Syria,” a Saudi Foreign Ministry statement said.
Facilitating the return of Syrian refugees and humanitarian access will also be discussed by Mekdad and bin Farhan.
Mekdad’s visit came two days before Saudi Arabia hosts another meeting of regional foreign ministers that will discuss Syria’s return to the Arab League.
Foreign ministers from Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait will meet Friday in Jeddah as well.
Saudi Arabia has also invited Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to the Arab League summit in Riyadh scheduled for 19 May.
Syria and Tunisia also agreed to reopen their respective embassies, the two countries said on Wednesday.
The Arab world’s effort to restore relations with Syria follows the landmark deal brokered by China between historic rivals Iran and Saudi Arabia. The deal ends a seven-year rift and restores diplomatic ties – in a powerful display of Beijing’s growing influence in West Asia.
Saudi FM Faisal bin Farhan hosting Syrian counterpart Faisal Mikdad
At the invitation of Prince Faisal bin Farhan Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia, Foreign and Expatriates Minister, Dr. Faisal Mikdad and the accompanying delegation have arrived to the city of Jeddah in Saudi Arabia on a working visit to discuss bilateral relations and issues of mutual interest.
Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Al-Khuraiji and a number of diplomats received Minister Mikdad and the accompanying delegation upon their arrival at Jeddah Airport.
لم يَخرج اللقاء الرباعي الذي عُقد على مستوى نواب وزراء خارجية كلّ من سوريا وتركيا وروسيا وإيران، بأيّ جديد يُذكر، وسط إصرار سوري واضح على التمسُّك بثلاثة بنود رئيسة تعدّها دمشق «ثوابت أساسية» لأيّ انفتاح محتمل على الجارة الشمالية، تتضمن: جدولاً معلناً لانسحاب القوات التركية من الشمال السوري، وعدم التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية السورية، والتعاون في مجال مكافحة الإرهاب. غير أن هذه المطالب قوبلت، دائماً، بمماطلة تركية مقرونة بوعود شفهية بانسحاب مشروطٍ بمتغيّرات دولية، ما يعني تالياً تعثّر جولة المفاوضات الأولى ضمن الإطار الرباعي، على رغم استعجال موسكو في إعلان بدء التحضير للقاء سيجري، في وقتٍ لاحق، على مستوى وزراء الخارجية
بعد تأجيل اللقاء الذي كان مقرّراً في شباط الماضي، نتيجة الزلزال الذي ضرب تركيا وسوريا بدايةً، ورفْض الأخيرة الانخراط في المسار قبل أن تتحدّد أرضية واضحة تفضي إلى انسحاب القوات التركية من المناطق التي تنتشر فيها شمال البلاد، عُقد اللقاء الرباعي على مستوى نواب وزراء خارجية كلّ من سوريا وتركيا وروسيا وإيران؛ علماً أنه كان من المفترض أن يجري على مستوى وزراء الخارجية، قبل أن يخفّض مستوى التمثيل، كخطوة أولى يمكن أن تمهّد للقاءات على مستويات أعلى، غير أن مخرجات اللقاء لا تُظهر أيّ تقدُّم يُعتدُّ به.
المسار الذي أعلنت دمشق سابقاً رفضه، من دون وضع أجندة واضحة له، يمثّل انسحاب القوات التركية هدفها النهائي، عادت للانخراط فيه بفعل ضغوط إيرانية وروسية، وعلى أُسس «واضحة ومعلَنة» تدور جميعها في فلك تحويل الوعود الشفهية التركية بسحب القوات، إلى جدول أعمال مكتوب وواضح، على أن تلعب كلّ من طهران وموسكو دور الضامن لتنفيذه، وذلك بالتوازي مع الاتفاق على تنفيذ خطوات مشتركة من شأنها حلّ أزمة اللاجئين، والتعاون في مجال ضبط الحدود. وتلك نقاط تشي تصريحات نائب وزير الخارجية السوري، أيمن سوسان، الذي رأَس وفد بلاده، بأنه لا محلّ لها على أرض الواقع، بعد عقْد ثلاثة اجتماعات على مدى يومَين (اجتماعان سوري – روسي وسوري – إيراني، وثالث رباعي). وإذ أشار سوسان، في الكلمة التي ألقاها خلال الاجتماع الرباعي، إلى أن «التوصيف القانوني للوجود العسكري غير الشرعي على الأراضي السورية سواء في شمال شرقي سوريا (قواعد التحالف الذي تقوده واشنطن)، أو في شمال غربها (القواعد التركية)، ومِن قِبَل أيٍّ كان، واضح للغاية (…) ينتهك أحكام القانون الدولي، ويخالف مقاصد ومبادئ ميثاق الأمم المتحدة، كما يتعارض مع علاقات حسن الجوار والمبادئ الناظمة للعلاقات السلمية بين الدول، ومع كلّ قرارات مجلس الأمن ذات الصلّة بسوريا»، فهو فتح الباب أيضاً أمام تعاون كبير مع الجارة الشمالية، لا سيما في مسألتَي المخاطر الأمنية واللاجئين. وأوضح أن «وجود أيّ خطر إرهابي يَفرض عمليّاً وقانونيّاً التعاون والتنسيق مع الدولة المعنيّة لمواجهته (…) يمكن التعاون في موضوع عودة اللاجئين السوريين من تركيا إلى أماكن إقامتهم الأصلية في سوريا، وهذا الأمر يتطلّب العمل على توفير المتطلّبات والبيئة اللازمة لذلك، بما فيها تحقيق الأمن والاستقرار عبر بسْط سلطة الدولة على أراضيها وتهيئة البنى التحتية والتمويل اللازم، والجانب السوري مستعدّ لاتخاذ الإجراءات التي تقع على عاتقه بناءً على ذلك». وفي كلمته، أعاد رئيس الوفد السوري التذكير بوعود تركية سابقة بسحب قوّاتها من الأراضي السورية، والتزامها بحلحلة ملفّ إدلب، وهو ما لم تفِ به، قائلاً: «لم نرَ حتى الآن أيّ مؤشرات إيجابية بخصوص انسحاب القوات التركية من سوريا، أو بخصوص محاربة الإرهاب والقضاء عليه في شمال غربي سوريا، وبالأخصّ في منطقة إدلب، وإعادة بسط سلطة الدولة على هذه المنطقة، لا بل إن تركيا لم تلتزم حتى بالتفاهمات التي تمّ التوصل إليها في إطار أستانا أو مع الجانب الروسي»، فاتحاً الباب أمام تعاون جدّي تكون هذه المرة موسكو وطهران شريكتين فيه، ضمن خطّة تتضمّن انسحاباً دقيقاً للقوات التركية من إدلب، واستعادة الجيش السوري السيطرة عليها بشكل سلس.
بدأت «هيئة تحرير الشام» إشعال الشمال السوري بمعارك على جبهات عدّة
الاجتماع الذي جاء بعد يوم من عقْد الوفد السوري لقاءات ثنائية مع الجانبَين الروسي والإيراني، أعادت خلالهما دمشق التشديد على ثبات مواقفها، تحوّل بمجمله إلى طاولة لطرْح الأفكار، حيث قام كلّ وفد بتقديم ما لديه، على أن يتمّ تحديد موعد للقاء آخر، أَعلنت الخارجية الروسية أنه سيكون على مستوى وزراء الخارجية، موضحةً أن المشاركين في الاجتماع الرباعي عرضوا مواقفهم بصورة مباشرة وصريحة واتّفقوا على مواصلة الاتصالات، وأن المشاورات بحثت مسائل الإعداد للقاء بين وزراء خارجية هذه الدول. وتضع المخرجات الضئيلة للاجتماع، وتمسُّك دمشق بثوابتها، الانتقال إلى خطوة لاحقة أكبر على عاتق أنقرة، التي باتت بحاجة ماسة إلى هذا الانفتاح لتعزيز حظوظ الرئيس رجب طيب إردوغان في الفوز، لا سيما وأن الملفّ السوري يلعب دوراً حاسماً فيها. وبطبيعة الحال، تدرك الحكومة التركية هذه النقطة، إذ أعلنت في مرّات عدة سابقة نيّتها سحْب قوّاتها من سوريا، وهو ما لا تنظر إليه دمشق بتفاؤل نتيجة تجارب سابقة غيّرت أنقرة خلالها مواقفها ونكثت بعهودها، ما يفسر أيضاً إصرار الحكومة السورية على الخروج ببيان مكتوب تضمنه إيران وروسيا، ويتضمّن تنفيذ التعهّدات، ويمنع حكومة «حزب العدالة والتنمية» من الالتفاف عليها، كما يضمن أن تكون هذه التعهّدات صادرة عن الدولة التركية، أيّاً كانت نتيجة الانتخابات الرئاسية.
اللقاء الذي جاء بدفع روسي واضح، يهدف، بمحصلته، إلى تحقيق قفزة على طريق حلّ الأزمة السورية، وفق المسار الروسي، وبوساطة إيرانية، يمكن النظر إليه على أنه خطوة أولى صغيرة، نجحت فيها موسكو وطهران في رفع مستوى التواصل بين سوريا وتركيا، من المستوى الأمني والعسكري إلى المستوى السياسي، على أمل أن تحقّق قفزات أوسع في المرحلة المقبلة. ويحتاج ما تقدَّم إلى مباحثات دقيقة بين الأطراف الأربعة، نتيجة تغوّل الدور التركي في الحرب السورية طيلة السنوات الـ12 الماضية وتشعّبه، بشكل يعيد الأوضاع إلى ما كانت عليه قبل اندلاع الحرب. ويعني هذا، في حال التوافق على مسألة إدلب والشمال السوري، الانتقال إلى مرحلة لاحقة يشكّل فيها التخلّص من الوجود الأميركي هدفاً مشتركاً للأطراف الأربعة.
ميدانياً، وبينما كانت الوفود الأربعة تعقد جلستها المطوّلة في موسكو، بدأت «هيئة تحرير الشام»، التي تستشعر ارتفاع الخطر مع كل خطوة تقرّب وجهات النظر السورية – التركية، إشعال الشمال السوري بمعارك على جبهات عدّة، آخرها إعزاز التي تَشهد اشتباكات عنيفة بين فصائل تابعة لـ«الجيش الوطني»، وأخرى بايعت زعيم «الهيئة»، أبي محمد الجولاني، تضمّ كتائب تابعة لـ«فريق ملهم التطوعي» الذي يتمتّع بعلاقات قوية مع رجل «القاعدة» السابق. ويؤكد هذا المسار مواصلة «تحرير الشام» تنفيذ مخطّطها لقضم الشمال، وصولاً إلى معبر «باب السلامة» مع تركيا في إعزاز، والمعابر التي تصل مواقع سيطرة الفصائل في ريف حلب مع مناطق سيطرة «قسد»، وأبرزها معبر «الحمران» في جرابلس، حيث تشهد مواقع سيطرة الفصائل في ريفَي حلب الشرقي والشمالي حالة استنفار كبيرة، وسط معارك تزداد كثافتها بشكل يومي قد تنتهي بفرض «الجولاني» نفسه «أميراً» على ريف حلب، تمهيداً لأيّ تطوّرات قد تجبره على التخلّي عن إدلب.
In his speech on the 30th anniversary of the founding of the Islamic Institution for Education – Al-Mahdi Schools (PBUH), Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, emphasized the need for the spirit of hope in these challenging times, stating that the resistance’s weapon was hope and faith.
Sayyed Nasrallah criticized the United States in his speech on Thursday and urged Lebanese people to find solutions instead of giving in to international pressures. He pointed up that despite corruption being a problem caused by Lebanese individuals, America is also a partner in this corruption by blocking deposits, loans, and investments from entering Lebanon.
Sayyed Nasrallah vowed that Hezbollah would not surrender and urged the need for cooperation and courage in finding solutions to the economic and political crisis in Lebanon.
“In the face of this despair, the resistance’s weapon was hope and faith in God, and the determination to confront and resist the enemy,” Sayyed Nasrallah stated, emphasizing that “the resistance’s hope and faith were the source of strength that enabled it to achieve victory and liberate the land.”
His eminence also noted that God has provided humanity with two significant saviors, namely Jesus Christ and the Imam Mahdi (PBUH), and the resistance is the force that brings hope and leads to victory against the Israeli enemy.
“In the current situation in Lebanon, where the economic crisis and the political situation are causing despair and frustration among the people, we must hold on to hope and faith in God, and work to confront and resist the challenges and difficulties we are facing.”
“When the Israelis occupied Lebanon, they aimed to spread a spirit of despair with political and social consequences, which could lead to the acceptance of the occupation without dignity, sovereignty, and honor,” he said. Sayyed Nasrallah underlined that the resistance, with its hope, continued its struggle against the Israeli enemy, and withstood it in 2006.
“In the past, the occupiers used killings, massacres, displacement, and the demolition of homes to strengthen the spirit of despair among the Lebanese people,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, giving an example of the Bir al-Abed massacre, where more than 75 martyrs lost their lives. He pointed out that America was behind the car bomb attack that aimed to spread terror and despair. Furthermore, he highlighted the involvement of some individuals claiming sovereignty in Lebanon in this massacre.
Yesterday marked the 38th anniversary of the Bir Al-Abed massacre, which took place on March 8, 1985 in the southern suburb of Beirut. The massacre was a result of a failed assassination attempt by American intelligence agencies and their allies against Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, who had been described as the spiritual leader of Hezbollah in the early eighties of last century. The majority of the victims were women and children, and the massacre occurred on International Women’s Day.
Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that the goal of such attacks is to create terror and despair in people’s hearts, and the attempt to assassinate Sayyed Fadlallah was a severe blow. He stated that threats of death, military war, and starvation do not intimidate us.
“We refuse to surrender, submit or give up because despair leads to surrender, and we will not allow that to happen.”
Sayyed Nasrallah expressed his admiration and support for Al-Mahdi Schools and affirmed his belief in the institution’s administration, teachers, and workers. He pledged to provide the necessary support for its development and expansion, given the importance of its work in maintaining the scientific and educational levels.
“Despite the challenging circumstances over the past 30 years, the institution has naturally and gradually developed, serving generations and transferring experience,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, emphasizing the institution’s steadfastness and appreciating the efforts of its workers, especially in recent years when the effort has doubled due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the difficult living conditions in Lebanon. He also pointed to the importance of education and building a good society to pave the way for a promising future.
Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that the role of teachers and educational institutions must not be limited to a profession, but rather it should be infused with a missionary and human spirit. He cautioned against those who use their knowledge to exploit others and take advantage of adverse conditions, underscoring the importance of education in building immunity against such exploitation. He also noted that education plays a vital role in shaping the moral and cultural values of a society, and lamented the negative influence of Western culture on curricula in many schools.
In early January, Lebanese public-school teachers went on strike to demand better compensation for their salaries, which are paid in Lebanese pounds that have significantly dropped in value against the dollar, leading to increased prices across the country. They also demanded improvements to their healthcare coverage and transport allowances. After two months on strike, many teachers returned to class on Monday, but they refused to teach afternoon classes to Syrian refugee children. Contract teachers, however, remained on strike.
Discussing the challenges facing the education sector in Lebanon, Sayyed Nasrallah acknowledged that educational institutions have been severely impacted by the prevailing circumstances, especially with the prolonged closure of public schools. He stressed the need for teachers to be good role models and to prioritize the welfare, success, and excellence of their students. In regards to private schools, his eminence suggested that increasing premiums to improve teachers’ salaries could be considered a humanitarian contribution, but cautioned against schools that prioritize profits over the well-being of their students and staff, calling such greed “hideous” and “inhumane”.
Sayyed Nasrallah concluded by stating, “We must maintain the educational process, especially in these difficult circumstances, and we must continue to work in order to educate generations, and we must maintain our educational institutions and provide them with support and assistance to enable them to perform their role in the best possible way.” He emphasized the importance of education and its role in building a good society, and urged everyone to contribute to this mission.
أكد الأمين العام لحزب الله، السيد حسن نصر الله، اليوم، أن أبواب الحل للأزمة في لبنان موجودة، داعياً إلى عدم الاستسلام والخضوع للشروط الدولية.
وقال نصر الله، في الذكرى الثلاثين لتأسيس «مدارس المهدي»، إن «المطلوب منّا الاستسلام ولا تتوقعوا منّا استسلاماً وانصياعاً وخضوعاً»، مشدداً على وجوب «عدم اليأس لأن نتيجة اليأس الاستسلام».
ورأى نصر الله أن «أبواب الحل موجودة»، مؤكداً أنه «لا يجب أن نستسلم للشروط الدولية والإقليمية والذين استلسموا لم ينجوا».
وفي الملف التربوي، حثّ نصر الله المعلمين والأساتذة في المدارس الرسمية و«الجامعة اللبنانية» على مواصلة العام الدراسي وعدم العودة إلى الإضراب، مطالباً الحكومة بتنفيذ ما قدّمته لهم.
ولفت نصر الله إلى إصرار بعض المدارس على الخاصة على «الرّبح الوفير»، مُعرباً عن تقديره أنها تريد «زيادة الأقساط لتحسين رواتب المعلمين، لكن هل يمكن ألّا نربح هاتين السنتين أو نربح بشكل معقول ومتواضع».
The United States, like the great ally that it is, has dragged Europe into another conflict, this time right at home, and bleeding it dry economically and politically under the pretext of fighting Russia.
The US scapegoat: Europe dragged into yet another conflict
It is a tale as old as time; ever since their declared allyship in the wake of World War II and the global status quo amid the Cold War, the United States and Europe – at least Western Europe – have been as close as allies can be. However, the United States is quite the abusive partner, forcing Europe to bear the brunt of any conflict it gets into as it emerges unscathed from its far-away lands across the Atlantic Ocean, and the Ukraine war serves as another prime example of how the US treats its allies.
Months before the Ukraine war, the United States and its European allies began bolstering their eastern flank through NATO member states. Little did Europe know what it was diving headfirst into: years of brewing tensions between Russia and the United States over Ukraine and its treatment of the people of the Donbass, as well as its usage as a political tool in the face of Moscow, exploded, and Europe was covered in ash while Washington was watching everything unfold from the comfort of its distant lands.
The situation hit the fan; Russia was now knee-deep in Ukraine and the United States started using everything in its power, including Europe, to curb Moscow and bolster Kiev’s standing. Washington had many tools at hand, most notably sanctions on Russia and arms shipments to Ukraine, both of which would be quite costly for Europe, especially due to how inconvenient the time was, given that the world was just now going back into full throttle after the pandemic brought the entire global economy into a grinding halt.
The West, somehow underestimating the repercussions of an economy as tremendous as Russia’s being thrown out of the global market, sanctioned the country in a bid to “punish” it for going against their expansionist aspirations, and the sanctions in question were not your run-of-the-mill sanctions because we are not talking about your run-of-the-mill economy here. The sanctions at hand affected everything from natural gas to gold – key pillars in any economy aspiring not to crash – which had massive reverberations throughout the West, all the way from Germany to the United States.
Gas prices reached all-time highs, and the global economy was bracing for disaster as inflation was affecting some of its biggest players. Economic powerhouses such as Germany, France, and the United States were being driven up walls due to the economic woes they were experiencing, all of which they were attributing to Russia itself rather than admitting to having committed numerous mistakes when it came to the measures they took against Russia.
US economy holding up better
A swift study of inflation rates and energy prices would be more than sufficient to exhibit the suffering inflicted on the West in the wake of war:
According to Eurostat, the European Union’s official statistical office, inflation in the EU in November 2022 was 11.1%, a stark year-on-year increase from November 2021’s 5.2% inflation rate. The Eurozone, meanwhile, was also suffering, just a little less. In November 2022, the inflation rate in the Eurozone was 10.1%, a less significant year-on-year increase from November 2021’s 4.9%.
Energy prices, on the other hand, are something else entirely. What had been 82.81 euros per megawatt-hour in terms of monthly electricity wholesale prices months before the war in August 2021 in Germany rose to a whopping 469.35 euros per megawatt-hour, an increase of 466.7%, a year later in August of 2022, six months after the start of the Ukraine war and about three months after the West to decided to try and take Russia entirely out of the global energy market.
Other countries were not better off. In fact, some were dealt even worse hands, as energy prices in Italy soared 382.4% to 543 euros per megawatt-hour, in Hungary, they rose 354.4% to 495.65 euros per megawatt-hour, and in Switzerland, they rose 490.5% to 488.14 euros per megawatt-hour. France was by far the worst off, with a striking increase of 536.9% to 492.99 euros per megawatt-hour.
At the same time, energy prices in the US averaged $167 per megawatt-hour in August 2022, a very mild year-on-year increase from August 2021’s $144 per megawatt-hour, showing that the energy crises barely affected the United States as it was not at all reliant on Russian gas.
Historic lows
Of course, the governments of the EU states had to heavily subsidize electricity as their citizens would not be able to pay off their bills if they were as high as they were driven up due to the sanctions on Russia, which led the governments in question to print more money in order to cover all the new, extra costs they had, plunging the Eurozone into record-high inflation, the likes of which had not been seen in decades.
The euro had not gone down below a dollar per since the early 2000s when it hit the low of $0.98 in January 2000, a year-on-year depreciation of 15% against the USD. The euro went through more woes, dropping to as low as $0.83 before bouncing back above the threshold three years later. What must be understood is that the decline of the euro in 2000 was the consequence of a free market reigning in the West, with many investors selling the euros they were holding in anticipation of an appreciation in the Eurozone’s currency after it had been tied with the greenback for some time at that point, with impatience prevailing, which led the euro to lose value. Securities had dominated in the euro, but as it had been at near-parity with the USD, investors felt forced to sell as the US government was making various moves that made the US economy more attractive for investors, such as the US Treasury’s 30-year bond posting strong gains and the US government reporting that orders for durable goods sharply increased before the new years, prompting experts to speculate incoming interest rate hikes.
Many things just happened to go right for the USD at the same time, making the greenback tremendous gains and putting it above the euro until the dollar fell in 2003 and made for one of the causes of the 2000s energy crisis. All in all, the euro was holding strong against the USD for nearly two decades before it made a sharp drop throughout 2022 that culminated in the Eurozone’s currency briefly dipping below parity against the USD in August amid fears of a worse energy crisis.
The euro was doing tremendously for decades, but European countries being forced to subsidies energy for their citizens and businesses so as not to leave their economies in shambles led the USD to rise above the euro due to the inflation the money-printing machines caused. The euro reached a low of $0.97 in September 2022 after having been at $1.17 a year earlier. It managed to slightly recover since, selling at $1.10 in early February, nearing pre-war levels, but the latest data shows that the euro is now on a downturn even against a struggling USD that is being bolstered by austerity measures from the Federal Reserve.
Struggling across the Atlantic, still doing better
In light of all the suffering in Europe, the United States was doing quite badly for itself. With energy prices reaching all-time highs and inflation soaring uncontrollably, Washington was between a rock and a hard place.
However, it wanted to ensure that Europe was just in a bad a position and wanted to ensure its own prosperity at the expense of the Europeans’, selling them energy with stark hikes that were unbearable, which largely affected the euro and gave further impetus to the USD. French Finance Minister Bruno Le Mair even went as far as taking shots at Washington, saying it should not be allowed to dominate the global energy market as the EU suffers the consequences of the conflict in Ukraine, stressing that it was unacceptable to let the US export LNG at prices four times higher than those paid by companies in the country.
According to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) measurement, inflation in the United States increased by 7.7% in a year until October of 2022, rising at its slowest rate in nine months after topping a forty-year high of 9.1% in a year until June of 2022. The inflation rates, though better than the EU’s, were mitigated by the Federal Reserve raising interest rates consecutive times, increasing the rate by 4.25% between March and December of last year.
Meanwhile, as the US economy showed growth in Q4 of 2022, increasing by 2.9%, the Eurozone was left in the dust with a mere 0.1% in growth after experts were expecting a recession for one of the most significant economic players in the international arena. At the same time, the European Union’s economy was stagnant, remaining stable in Q4 of 2022.
Despite the lack of a recession in the Eurozone as a whole, the German economy contracted by 0.2% in the last quarter of 2022, prompting experts to believe that the economic powerhouse was heading into a recession.
Italy, the EU’s third-largest economy, also experienced negative growth, as its GDP contracted by 0.1% in Q4 of 2022. Both Germany and Italy were among the hardest hit due to their heavy reliance on Russian gas, the stream of which was cut off from Europe in light of the Ukraine war.
The latest signs are showing that the Eurozone is heading for a recession in Q1 or Q2 of 2023, with experts saying that the European Central Bank’s policy of economic tightening through various austerity measures will cause the region’s economy to struggle as households themselves struggle with the cost of living crisis and sluggish demand.
Buddy-buddy with the wrong guy
One key aspect of the crisis that the EU and the Eurozone have been hit by is that they were caused by a conflict that spurred out between Russia and the United States that Washington sought to turn into a proxy war by using its allies in Europe against Moscow rather than embroiling itself in any direct conflict.
The European Union is no stranger to getting dragged into conflict by the United States, but the extent to which Washington is alienated from the ongoing war is quite stark in comparison to previous wars.
As discussed previously in “Analysis of Euro-paralysis: Uncle Sam’s last Afghan stand” while shedding light on the United States dragging Europe into the Afghanistan war, when Washington dragged NATO into a multi-generational war in Afghanistan, the organization’s first commitment outside European territories, the United States is not the best ally one could have by their side.
In the end, the European hand was forced into Afghanistan, and the burden was basically split in half, with Europe reaping fewer benefits, the US was in control of a geopolitically significant country, and it was intimidating its regional foes, namely Russia, China, and Iran.
Europe has been the chief bearer of consequences whenever there was a US-related flop anywhere in the Eastern hemisphere, such as the Syrian refugee crisis that took place in the wake of the war on Syria. Alongside many other crises, this is a fine testament to Washington’s strategy toward Europe.
All that Europe gained from Afghanistan was more refugees, more dead soldiers, and wasted taxpayer money. The UK and Germany, the second-largest troop contributors, spent an estimated $30 billion and $19 billion, respectively, throughout 20 years of war in Afghanistan.
The situation today is not too different from how it was back during and after the Afghan war, as the United States is now emerging with loads of profits made from the war after having Europe spend hundreds of millions on Ukraine, with the Kiel Institute for the World Economy reporting that: “The United States, for example, spent more than 3 times as much per year compared to their expenses in the Afghanistan war after 2001 (measured as a percent of GDP). Germany committed more than 3 times as much to Allies in the Gulf War of 1990/91 compared to what it has committed to Ukraine (again measured in percent of GDP).”
According to the institute, “The Americans have earmarked a total of just over 73.1 billion euros for Ukraine support. For the EU, the comparable figure is 54.9 billion euros.”
The head of the German Chambers of Industry and Commerce said the Ukraine war will have cost the German economy around 160 billion euros ($171 billion), or some 4% of its gross domestic output, in lost value creation by the end of the year.
‘Give’ only to take
Though the United States gave more aid to Ukraine, around $20 billion more, Europe is still doing worse than the US. The US economy is doing far better than expected, especially as key companies, especially energy companies, and firms within the military-industrial complex, are making bank off the suffering of Europeans and Ukrainians alike.
The share price of Lockheed Martin was up 37% by the end of 2022 as the production of Javelin anti-tank missiles by the company increased from 2,100 to about 4,000 a year. The arms company signed a $7.8 billion contract on the modification of the F-35 aircraft and $431 million to deliver new HIMARS and “support services for the US Army and its foreign allies.”
Meanwhile, in November last year, the US awarded Raytheon a $1.2 billion contract for the supply of six National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) to Ukraine. Last year, it was reported that Washington was intending to send 6,500 Javelin anti-tank missile systems made by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin to Ukraine. Other contractors, such as Boeing and Northrop Grumman, are among other profiteers from the war.
The EU is not making similar profits in light of all the losses it is dealing with. Even when it comes to post-war reconstruction efforts. “The Ministry of Economy of Ukraine and BlackRock, the world’s largest investment company, have signed a Memorandum of Understanding agreeing on a framework for consultative assistance in developing a special platform to attract private capital for the recovery and support of Ukraine’s economy,” the Ukrainian government announced in November, meaning the US is making profits when it comes to the destruction of Ukraine and is making profits when it comes to its reconstruction.
One conclusion can be drawn from the whole debacle surrounding Ukraine: The United States is using the situation to subvert Europe and leave its economy in shambles, prompting many to talk about the de-industrialization of the European Union, with numerous economic sectors, such as glass, chemicals, metals, fertilizer, pulp and paper, ceramics, and cement suffering in light of the ongoing crisis.
Additionally, with gas prices four times that of the US and six times higher than they were before, several industries are considering the option of relocating abroad for cheaper energy prices, meaning that at the end of the day, many European powerhouses might be left with nothing, or just crumbs, if this situation is upheld.
Europe is before a grim reality once again because of the United States, with its economy heading toward the ghastly unknown and its industry dealing with the repercussions of terrible policy-making. Europe, once a US ally, might become a vassal for Washington as it grows more dependent on a country that only seeks to exploit it to bolster its standing in the international arena.
The son, right, and friends of Syrian refugee Naziha Al-Ahmad carry her body to be buried in a cemetery after she died during an earthquake, in Elbistan, southeastern, Turkey, Feb. 10, 2023. The U.N. says Turkey hosts about 3.6 million Syrians who fled their country’s 12-year civil war, along with close to 320,000 people escaping hardships from other countries. | Francisco Seco / AP
Suffering in Syria and Turkey caused by a strong earthquake on Feb. 6 has elicited an immense worldwide humanitarian response. The toll as of press time for this article was 36,000 people dead, with the number of recorded deaths steadily rising as rubble from collapsed buildings is removed. Unusually cold weather and snow add to the grief and difficulties in delivering aid material to survivors.
Compounding matters is the longstanding internal conflict in both countries aggravated by foreign interventions. The Turkish government contends with a Kurdish insurgency formerly active within its own borders and now based across the southern border in Iraq and Syria.
The Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad, meanwhile, has confronted U.S.- and European-supported rebel forces fighting in northern Syria since 2011.
The humanitarian disaster from the earthquake is further aggravated by the warlike interference in Syria’s affairs that has gone on for years and is still underway, particularly the role of economic sanctions employed by nations led by the U.S. government. Of concern is U.S. imperialism’s seeming disregard of human suffering and deaths as it wields the weapon of economic war.
A civil war has raged in Syria for 11 years. The U.S. government, in conjunction with allies, supports elements of the anti-Assad resistance. They hold territory in northern Syria, where even U.S. troops are deployed.
The civil war has led to displaced populations of refugees, some living in government-controlled Syria, 3.6 million others living precariously in Turkey, and 4.1 million more living in conflict-ridden northern Syria; they were dependent on humanitarian aid prior to the earthquake. Kurdish rebels, anti-Assad rebels, and radical Islamists control their own portions of that area.
The earthquake has caused more death and destruction in Turkey than in Syria. Turkey registered 31,643 deaths as of Feb. 13 and Syria 4,574 deaths, of which 3,160 occurred in rebel-held areas.
The delivery of humanitarian aid material is always difficult in situations of natural disaster. The Turkish government reports offers of assistance from 71 countries. Search and rescue teams and shipments of materials have arrived there from dozens of them.
Conditions in Syria, however, are different. Western countries are contributing relatively little. Shipments of aid material have entered Syria from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, United Arab Emirates, and India.
Rescue teams and aid shipments have been promised or have arrived from China, Iran, Russia, Cuba, and Algeria. Venezuela sent teams to both affected countries, and its teams were the first foreign rescuers to arrive in Northern Syria.
Physical barriers further complicate matters in Syria. Only the Bab al-Hawa crossing of the Turkish-Syrian border remains open; three others are closed due to Russian and Chinese pressure in the United Nations Security Council. Those countries regard U.S.-supported rebels active in the region as “terrorists.”
The Assad government is requiring that aid for areas under its control enter through Damascus. Air shipments to the capital, though, have been hobbled due to runway damage left over from an Israeli attack in January.
Economic sanctions against the Assad government, in force since 2011, pose the main difficulty for countries that would provide assistance to Syria. Governments worldwide have joined the United States, leader of the pack, in sanctioning Syria.
Speaking to the press on Feb. 6, State Department spokesperson Ned Price insisted, “We are determined to do what we can to address the humanitarian needs of the Syrian people.” He indicated that any U.S. aid would be delivered exclusively to NGOs, the implication being that economic sanctions remain in effect.
The head of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent called upon the United States and its allies to “lift their siege and sanctions on Syria so that rescue and relief work can proceed unimpeded.”
Speaking for China’s foreign ministry, Mao Ning likewise called for an end to sanctions, pointing out that U.S. “military strikes and harsh economic sanctions have caused huge civilian casualties,” while U.S. troops have assured the “plunder … [of] more than 80% of Syria’s oil production.”
A UN Special Rapporteur had already urged in November 2022 that sanctions against Syria be ended on grounds of “destruction and trauma suffered by the Syrian people since 2011.”
On Feb. 9, the U.S. government blinked. The Treasury Department provided authorization lasting for 180 days for “all transactions related to earthquake relief.” Other nations may follow suit.
The difficulty remains: An aggressive U.S. government is prone to trivializing claims that economic sanctions threaten human lives. The economic measures against Syria’s government revive the spectacle of sanctions aggravating humanitarian catastrophe from another cause. That was Cuba’s situation in having to deal with both U.S. sanctions and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The current situation in Syria calls for a critical look at the U.S. government’s frequent resort to economic sanctions as it wages what amounts to permanent war. Sanctions offer the advantage of impunity. An aggressor’s profile is lowered even as threats of ungovernability and human suffering mount.
As has long been known, those who suffer most from sanctions aimed at a national economy are a society’s poorest citizens. Sanctions violate human rights, particularly the right of citizens to lead economically sustainable lives and their right to benefit from social programming that is determined collectively, notably healthcare, education, and social security for elders.
Although legal experts have identified criminal aspects of U.S. sanctions, even crimes against humanity, the upshot has been impunity for the U.S. government, in part due to U.S. disregard for the International Criminal Court.
Frequent use of economic sanctions represents one aspect of non-stop war-making on the part of the U.S. government and of nations following the U.S. lead. Sanctions are in the same category as the use of one’s own military forces, the use of proxy warriors and other agents, and internal subversion leading to destabilization and/or coups.
Syria’s people have been on the receiving end of all that for years, and now, even with the devastation of the earthquake, they’re not getting much respite.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 