Syria and Lebanon: A New Opportunity

Elias Harfoush

Like a couple returning to their marriage nest after a long separation caused by disagreements and infidelities on both sides, the renewed official relations between Lebanon and Syria seem loaded with the remnants of the past, a past associated with caution after the disappointing experience of living under one roof.

From now on, any look by either side toward a third party outside this marriage will raise questions and suspicions. Both sides are returning to this relationship for reasons against their will, imposed by the custody of children, the pressures of neighbors, and failure to find another right partner during the separation. This is why each will be keeping a watchful eye on one another while all eyes will be on both of them. In other words, this new phase will be dominated by suspicions from both sides. In such a sensitive period, each has to avoid making any missteps that may return the conflicts to square one.

To ensure future success with a return of this kind, it is necessary to avoid issues of the past as much as possible, especially those issues that awake memories of trouble, whether related to the Higher Council, the issue of the missing, or the demarcation of rooms within the same house. This is why it would have been better to resolve these pending problems before ending the separation to completely avoid any sources of suspicion. Ignoring the causes of disputes or failing to resolve them can trigger new conflicts, especially given the ill intentions of many who wish harm for this relationship and are obsessed by their jealousy as they wish another failure for this marriage.

The most serious aspect of the reunion between Lebanon and Syria is that it is based on common interests. The initially weak love between the two is now dominated by the desires for revenge in certain areas, a desire fed by the memories of the past. What makes the suspicions worse is that the children are divided in their loyalties to their parents as a result of poor upbringing that failed to cement belongingness to the household. It is this divisiveness that pushes a few to further their loyalties to one side at the expense of the other, even if this destroys the renewed relationship or even the whole house.

To a few optimists, this opportunity should be seized. For the first time, there is an official marriage contract instead of the past cohabitation arrangement in which the boundaries of the relationship, the lines of jurisdiction within the house and the limits of the responsibility to spend on children were poorly defined. It is because of this that at times there was unauthorized confiscation of the property and belongings of the other, furthering the mutual distrust. The agreement, however, is insufficient to guarantee a successful marriage. There are numerous similar precedents that have failed in the past, especially among Arabs, despite all the vows, agreements and official treaties.

Being candid about the problems of the past relationship and its negative aspects may be the best path to the future. For this relationship to be mutually even, negativities must be recognized then overcome, that is of course, if the honest intentions are there. On the other hand, if one side feels that it has been forced back to the household as a result of a fake victory, then this would be the best recipe for an imminent failure. The previous experience has proven that seeking strength in victories, especially victories overseas, can only set the grounds for grudges, the type of which led to the grand failure three years ago, a failure that still haunts the memory.


*Published in the London-based AL HAYAT on August 18, 2008.