Lebanon reduces its representation at the conference on internally displaced persons in Damascus

Lebanon is one of the countries in the Syrian neighborhood most affected by the Syrian exodus to their land, and there are those who decided that their presence at the conference organized by Russia on Syrian soil to bring them back to their country was timid. Does this decision have in its background a commitment to Washington, fear of sanctions and a request from a friendly and lost Arab?

Beirut awaits in the middle of next week, a very important event, represented by the convening of the international conference for the return of Syrian refugees to Syria, which Russia will participate in the organization in Damascus on the 11th and 12th of this month. This conference, which the United States of America called for a boycott, and its ambassador to the United Nations considered that “it is not appropriate for Russia to supervise it as it supports President Bashar al-Assad.” Invitations were sent to 108 countries to attend, but the focus was on neighboring countries where the number extends. The oldest of the displaced. The importance of this conference lies in being an activation of the previous Russian initiative and the establishment of an implementation mechanism for the return of displaced persons and a start for reconstruction in Syria. In view of this importance, a high-level Russian delegation was formed and toured the countries to encourage and push them to attend in the interests of them and Syria. Despite attempts to move the conference venue to another capital, it was insisted on keeping it in Damascus, to refute all allegations that the Syrian state refused to return them and because Syria is the natural place to hold the conference.
Lebanon is one of the invited countries, which the Russian delegation visited to deliver the invitation, where it met with officials who all, without exception, highlighted the importance and necessity of this return. But the surprise was that some people decided to reduce Lebanon’s representation at the conference, despite the fact that the Russian delegation had previously expected in their meetings that representation would be at the ministerial level. Is there any justification for this decision, given that Lebanon is one of the neighboring countries most affected by the issue of displacement and the failure of such a conference will have catastrophic repercussions?
For years, the cries for help from the political forces to help Lebanon prevent the explosion of the “mine” of the Syrian refugees did not stop. However, these forces, and the moment of truth is barely coming, until it becomes clear that their statements do not match their intentions. Although the entire Lebanese state had a duty regarding this issue, until the President of the Republic and the Free Patriotic Movement led it, and they were proactive in taking charge of their affairs.
This current did not leave the opportunity to place the responsibility of the deteriorating conditions and the economic, social and sometimes security collapse on the refugees. He used his file as a necessity and necessity for him, and increased it over all other powers, which is why some of his ministers considered that refugees were the cause of the destruction of infrastructure, including water and electricity cuts. Aounist’s investment did not stop at these limits, as the refugees were thrown into the political archives. The day Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri was kidnapped in Riyadh, Minister Gebran Bassil said at the time: “Do not fear stability, because the presence of refugees constitutes a protective umbrella for the country, and no one from the international community will accept a vibration of security for fear of an influx of refugees to Europe.
However, the move confirming the momentum to tackle this file has not taken any real steps. In 2018, Moscow launched an initiative to return displaced Syrians to their country. At the time, Lebanon responded with a timid response, and Presidents Michel Aoun and Saad Hariri entered into conflicting calculations about who would be their godfather, and the initiative was lost. Today, with Moscow renewing its initiative by trying to hold an international conference on Syrian soil, Lebanon is making the same mistake. Al-Akhbar learned that just days after the departure of the Russian delegation that had recently visited the country to present Lebanon with an invitation to attend the conference, he was officially informed that Lebanon would not participate at a high political level. and that he would be represented through his ambassador to Syria, Saad Zakhia. What applies to the current applies to the rest of the parties and currents in not fully assuming their responsibility, neither on the humanitarian side, nor on the political side, nor the national responsibility imposed by the work, far from any loyal or oppositional political calculation in tackling a problem that gets worse day by day.
This is a problem that raises many questions about who is responsible for making that decision. What if you were in your environment for fear of US sanctions? Or is it an attempt to win lost Arab affection and an attempt to keep Lebanon in the ranks of countries that refrain from opening up to Syria and improving relations with it without American approval?
Political forces compete with responsibility for the decision. Although some affirm that “it must be taken in partnership between the presidents of the republic and the government”, sources close to them affirm that “such a decision needs a government, and the government has not yet been formed.” Of course, this pretext falls against the logic that “whoever makes a decision on the size of the indirect negotiations with Israel on the demarcation of the maritime borders in the absence of the government, can do so with respect to the conference on internally displaced persons.” In the context, high-level political circles are surprised that “the two ministers of Foreign Affairs and Displaced Persons are not included in the delegation”, and “Major General Abbas Ibrahim is excluded since he handles this file in coordination with Syrian authorities ”. According to the information, “no one spoke with Ibrahim about this matter, and it was not known. How was coordination or agreement achieved on the matter? The circles said that “Lebanon has more interest in this conference than the Syrian state, and its failure will do us great harm,” considering that “the first forms of failure are the size and type of assistance.” The sources said that “it was possible to send at least one presidential envoy to give a positive signal and highlight the seriousness of those involved in their attempts to resolve this issue.” Sources asked: “Whose interest is in this decision? And conform to any side? There are many countries that will be represented by a ministerial delegation, and the Syrian opponents will be present, so can we be more royal than the king? The circles recalled much about the danger of the survival of the displaced and the related settlement projects. Will this push the President of the Republic to reconsider this decision and correct the mistake?