The beirut tragedy should jolt regional powers into helping lebanon. It won’t | thearticle

The impact of the blast that rocked Beirut is still being felt, with the toll of death and destruction sadly rising. Inevitably there have been conspiracy theories suggesting that this was

some kind of bomb or missile attack. This being 2020, one of the main proponents of this baseless theory was President Trump, who implausibly claimed that his generals had told him the

explosion had been caused by “a bomb of some kind”. Back in the real world, it appears very clear that this was a terrible accident, caused by years of neglect and incompetence. Coming in

the year that Lebanon has faced an economic and banking collapse and widespread popular outrage at the deep corruption of the country’s ruling class, Lebanon was already on the brink of a

breakdown in its institutions. The middle classes have seen their savings wiped out as the small country has grappled with endless regional conflicts and the influx of over a million Syrian

refugees. The apocalyptic destruction in Beirut, with over 300,000 people left homeless by the blast, feels like the final straw. With the port destroyed, this import-dependent country may

not even be able to bring in the basic foodstuffs on which it relies. It may be justified to conclude, as Daniel Johnson suggested on Wednesday, that Lebanon is now a “failed state”. As a

small country with complex politics structured around its differing faith communities, Lebanon is inherently divided and subjected to constant manipulation by powerful outsiders. Many of its

Shi’a Muslims fall under Iran’s influence, its Sunnis under the Arab Gulf’s, its Christians historically closer to France, the former colonial power. But in recent months the Lebanese

people appear to have been united in their disdain for a self-sustaining ruling elite, who live in luxury, as the masses struggle to afford food. The reaction of the international community

to the tragedy has been swift, with cargoes of aid and experts arriving from the Middle East, Europe and North America. But there may also be an indication of the wider political impact to

come. France’s President Macron made a swift visit to Beirut, declaring that without major reform the country would “continue to sink” and promised that French aid would not fall into

corrupt hands. There is a tendency after a tragedy to claim, hopefully, that Lebanon “will never be the same again” and that the “big blast should lead to a big change in Lebanon”. Macron

has announced the need for a new “political initiative”. It’s undeniable that Lebanon’s political structures have failed. But it would be naive to assume they are any easier to rebuild than

the shattered remains of Beirut itself. Lebanon has always fallen victim to the manoeuvring of regional and global powers. Already, the outsiders who seek to control and manipulate Lebanon

are pressing their advantage. Part of the reason that Lebanon’s economic crisis has been so severe is that Gulf countries have been unwilling to bail the country out, for fear of their money

reaching Hezbollah, Lebanon’s powerful Shi’a militant movement which is regarded by many as a terrorist organisation and has close ties to Iran. For years, Hezbollah has been accused of

controlling Beirut’s port and of misusing this power for its own benefit. Already, some Lebanese are blaming Hezbollah for the blast, suggesting it took advantage of its control of the port

to keep a huge quantity of explosives in the city. On the other side, the _Tehran Times_ has reported that Israel and the United States are “beneficiaries” of the tragedy. If a new

“political initiative” for Lebanon is a realistic option, it will require countries that are currently embroiled in proxy wars, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, to be willing to engage

directly on the country’s future. Ordinarily, the diplomatic heavy lifting for that sort of thing would come from a well-intentioned outsider, such as the United States. These are not

ordinary times. France may be able to play this role, but it is not a given that they have sufficient influence to bring the relevant parties together. Perhaps this explosion will be

sufficient to jolt previous enemies into co-operation. Experience suggests otherwise.