We publish some excerpts from a dialogue with Lorenzo Trombetta, journalist, writer and correspondent for Ansa and other national and international newspapers.
Given the numerous upheavals in the Middle East in the last two years, we asked Lorenzo Trombetta for a moment of discussion and in-depth analysis, the first – we hope – of many to come. For us it is essential, despite having a strong presence in the area, to continuously compare ourselves with experts and scholars to always have a complete picture of the area. In addition to discovering new elements, they are all opportunities to reflect on how best to approach the various crisis situations.
In particular, we asked Lorenzo for an update on Lebanon and Syria and possible future scenarios. We publish some excerpts from the dialogue we had with him.
How to approach the Middle East
Before addressing the two Lebanon-Syria issues with all their articulations, I make a premise: I tend to consider geographical spaces beyond the borders of nation-states. For years, I and other colleagues have been trying to have a look that goes beyond because, as you know since you are immersed in the local reality, what happens in one area has inevitable repercussions on the other, even if a boundary traced there, in fact only about a century ago, passes through. And, as in the case of northern Lebanon, for example, that border is really very porous.
The issue of migration and security are themes that highlight this interconnection between territories; therefore, I always try to make a speech that takes into account these connections. I always invite anyone, especially those who have never been to these places, to reflect, to have a more transnational vision that tries to recompose certain spaces. An example is the Beka'a Valley [in Lebanon, on the border with Syria ed.], which inevitably looks to Damascus, especially from a social and economic point of view, more than to Beirut. Although Beirut is the capital from an institutional point of view, we must try to establish synergies, as far as possible, in the spaces that each has.
What happened on December 8 in Syria is connected to the "ceasefire" in Lebanon: the chronology itself tells us how everything is somehow connected, but not because I intend to conspiracy, but in the sense of imagining a complex design. I don't want to think that everything was planned in a precise strategic design. However, when the offensive from Idlib started on November 27, the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel had also just begun. Not in the sense that they coordinated: "Can I leave? Yes, go."
However, we are in a context in which the human factor is decisive, like all other factors, and probably a series of actors, including individuals, have found a political and geopolitical opportunity in that particular time space. The events began in Syria, but, if we want to identify a geographical point from which some things started, we can say that they began in Lebanon, or more precisely in its western part.
Lebanon: what's happening and what are the possible developments?
We are in a transition phase, with legitimate hopes for change in Lebanon and Syria, but that will take time. In a context like the Lebanese one, where established practices are rooted in mentality, changes must be gradual. The management of resources and services is fundamental for real change. Expectations are high, especially with regard to the Prime Minister in charge, Nawaf Salam, who has a promising profile and a relevant academic past. However, change is met with strong resistance, including political and religious groups entrenched in the system.
Salam is in a difficult position, where he must negotiate change within the current rules, avoiding alienating more influential groups such as Hezbollah. Aoun, the new president, seems more oriented towards defending external interests, such as those of the United States and Israel, while Salam seeks internal change. The political situation is complex and it is not certain that change can happen quickly.
The system of distribution of resources and services is still dominated by a consociational power, where real change is hindered by sectoral interests. Migration, moreover, is a phenomenon that highlights the dysfunctions of the system and the perpetuation of inequalities. In this context, the outlook for normal people has not yet changed, with continued structural difficulty. The hope for genuine change is still far away, with the risk that the beneficiaries of humanitarian projects will continue to live in vulnerable conditions.
Syria: what are the prospects for this new situation?
The situation in Syria is obviously very complex, with different areas under autonomous forms of government. After the change of power on December 8, Syria is not only governed by a central power, but there are various forms of autonomy at the local level. Despite the government of Ahmad al-Shara [noto come Jawlani n.d.r.], power is fragmented and each city has its own governance formula, which negotiates directly with the central government.
Governance today is therefore made up of local agreements, often with influential groups that have reorganized, such as local notables who lost power in the 1980s and have now been reinstated in positions of power. In addition, resources must be kept in mind, especially natural and territorial ones, which are very important and are shaping power dynamics.
The central government is trying to establish a new constitutional structure, but the discussion is still being prepared. The creation of a new constitution, which could take years, is still a long way off, and this has led to the creation of preparatory committees that have not yet produced concrete results. The Syrian constitution, which has roots in the 1920s, needs to be updated, but the process is proceeding slowly.
At the same time, Syrian institutions in the last 10 years have been corrupt and malfunctioning, despite the fact that there have always been highly qualified figures. So much so that many positions of the past regime have been confirmed so as not to interrupt some processes. But at the institutional level, deep reforms are needed to create a functional and transparent state. And, although some announcements have been made, the reality of state functioning is still far from that of an efficient government.
On the economic level, Syria is trying to recover thanks to the help of external countries such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. However, in this way it risks becoming a new "Lebanon", where those who offer the best financing acquire political influence, thus undermining the sovereignty of the country. In this scenario, regional powers such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey are playing a key role in shaping Syrian policy, particularly with regard to resource management and regional stability.
And here comes the Kurdish question that remains central, with Turkey trying to extend its control over northern Syria, countering Kurdish forces. In the northern part of the Euphrates, various clashes are still underway. This conflict reflects a broader struggle for territorial sovereignty and control of resources. Syria is therefore facing a major challenge: deciding whether it will be a country for all its citizens or whether it will continue to divide resources and power between ethnic and sectarian groups, such as Sunnis, Alawites and Kurds.
The issue of citizenship and rights in Syria is closely linked to the ethnic issue, as the current system reflects a hierarchy between groups. This is a theme that goes beyond simple religious conflict and touches the roots of the formation of a Syrian national identity. Internal divisions are still strong, and if left unaddressed, they could continue to undermine the country's political future.
