Lebanon: the threatened jewel at the heart of an implacable chessboard

Lebanon: on the edge of the geopolitical precipice, between external pressures and internal crises

Lebanon has never been closer to a breaking point. Between external pressures, internal crises and regional ambitions, the country of Cedar finds itself at the center of a complex geopolitical game, where it is no longer a real actor, but a field on which other powers advance their pawns. The threat of a new civil war, potentially more devastating than that of 1975-1990, looms over the country.

A geopolitical vise that is tightening

Western capitals are demanding rapid disarmament of Hezbollah, without addressing the root cause of its influence: its strategic anchoring in the Iranian orbit. Israel, benefiting from implicit support, maintains constant military pressure, ready to strike its targets in southern Lebanon as well as in the Bekaa plain.

Faced with this pressure, Tehran considers Lebanon as a central element of its regional system. For Iran, giving in on this front would mean weakening its position throughout the Middle East. In this regional chess game, Lebanon is seen as an expendable piece, not as a player in its own right.

The lingering shadows of Damascus and Ankara

Lebanon’s prolonged instability is reviving old appetites. Damascus has never renounced its influence over the country, forged by decades of tutelage and political interference. Ankara, more discreet but strategically active, seeks to increase its presence in the Eastern Mediterranean, exploiting every flaw in the Lebanese political architecture.

Each internal crisis thus becomes an opportunity for regional powers to strengthen their influence, to the detriment of national stability. The structural weakness of the Lebanese state constitutes a breath of fresh air for these external ambitions.

History as a warning

The Lebanese conflict of 1975-1990 left deep scars in society and the economy. But a new conflict would not be a simple repetition: it would lead to even more radical fragmentation, weakening the last bases of national cohesion. History shows that it is not people who start wars, but those who hope to benefit from them. In the Lebanese case, they are numerous, and their means of action are formidable.

A narrow path to avoid collapse

Ignoring Iran in the Lebanese equation would be a major strategic error. The only realistic approach involves a discreet but concrete dialogue with Tehran, in order to negotiate a gradual and controlled disarmament of Hezbollah. This path is not synonymous with capitulation, but with diplomatic realism to prevent the country from becoming a proxy battlefield.

At the same time, national unity must once again become a priority. President, Prime Minister and army must speak with one voice, not to satisfy the expectations of the great powers, but to preserve internal peace. Without internal cohesion, no external strategy will be able to protect Lebanon.

Lebanon cannot afford pride

A crossroads of civilizations for more than 6,000 years, Lebanon has survived thanks to its resilience and its capacity for reinvention. But today, the country no longer has the luxury of ideological posturing or internal quarrels. The challenge is not only to avoid war: it is to preserve the plural identity of the country and its historical role in the region, from Beirut to Tripoli, from Mount Lebanon to the Bekaa plain.

Lucid realism as a survival plan

The salvation of Lebanon requires lucid realism:

• Recognize current geopolitical truths.

• Dialogue with all stakeholders, including those who are disruptive.

• Protect internal unity and sovereignty at all costs.

To refuse this realism is to risk transforming the country into a collateral victim of a conflict that it did not choose. Preserving Lebanon also means preserving a unique civilizational jewel in the world, a space where communities, cultures and intertwined histories coexist.